An Introduction to the NCOIC: Position Paper by Scott Simkin

www.ncoic.org

Position Paper An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

March 2005

Copyright ÂŠ 2005, Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium This document may be copied and displayed for any purpose without charge, provided that (a) this copyright notice and rights statement is included in any such copy, and (b) this document is reproduced in full and without alteration.

Position Paper An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘) Document Number: NCOIC_PPD_0501

Published by the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, March 2005. Comments relating to the material contained in this document may be submitted to the NCOIC Position Paper Working Group through pubs-positionpaper@global.ncoic.org.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. vi 1

Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) ..................................... 1 1.1 Current State of Government Systems.............................................................. 1 1.1.1 Government’s Changing Business Models .......................................... 2 1.1.2 Changing Nature of Government and Military Operations .................. 2 1.1.3 Department of Defense (DoD) Challenge ............................................ 4 1.1.4 Intelligence Community Challenge...................................................... 6 1.1.5 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Challenge .......................... 7 1.1.6 Civilian Agencies and Commercial Enterprise Challenge ................... 8 1.1.7 International Considerations................................................................. 8 1.1.8 Call for Interoperable Governments..................................................... 9 1.2 The Need for NCOIC...................................................................................... 10 1.3 Value Creation ................................................................................................ 11 1.3.1 The Knowledge Domain .................................................................... 11 1.3.2 The Enablement Domain.................................................................... 11 1.3.3 The Transformation Domain .............................................................. 11 1.4 NCOIC Vision ................................................................................................ 12 1.5 NCOIC Mission .............................................................................................. 12 1.6 NCOIC Objectives and Initial Strategies........................................................ 13 1.7 NCOIC Values................................................................................................ 14 1.7.1 Value to the Customer – Government ................................................ 15 1.7.2 Value to Large-Scale Integrators and Platform Providers.................. 16 1.7.3 Value to Product and Service Companies .......................................... 17 1.7.4 Value to Citizens ................................................................................ 17

Guiding Principles .................................................................................................... 18 2.1 Network-Centricity ......................................................................................... 18 2.1.1 Network-Centric Concepts for Military Applications ........................ 18 2.1.2 Network-Centric Concepts for Commercial Applications ................. 19 2.2 Interoperability ............................................................................................... 20 2.3 Open Standards............................................................................................... 21 2.3.1 Standards Categories .......................................................................... 22 2.3.2 Common Principles Enabled by Standardization ............................... 23 2.3.3 Principles for Standardization ............................................................ 23 2.3.4 Key Benefits of Open Standards ........................................................ 24 2.3.5 Open Standards Adoption .................................................................. 25 2.4 Open Source.................................................................................................... 26 2.5 Patterns ........................................................................................................... 26 2.6 Certified Products ........................................................................................... 27 2.7 Building Blocks .............................................................................................. 27 2.8 Lifecycle ......................................................................................................... 28

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

iii

NCOIC Background.................................................................................................. 30 3.1 Historical Start-Up.......................................................................................... 30 3.2 Initial Members............................................................................................... 32 3.3 Selection of The Open Group ......................................................................... 32

The NCOIC Organization ......................................................................................... 34 4.1 NCOIC Organizational Model........................................................................ 34 4.1.1 Executive Council .............................................................................. 35 4.1.2 Technical Council............................................................................... 36 4.1.3 Business Council ................................................................................ 37 4.1.4 Advisory Council ............................................................................... 38 4.1.5 Affiliate Council................................................................................. 38 4.1.6 The Open Group................................................................................. 39 4.1.7 Membership........................................................................................ 40 4.1.8 Review and Approval Process............................................................ 41 4.2 Collaboration .................................................................................................. 41 4.2.1 Users................................................................................................... 42 4.2.2 Groups ................................................................................................ 42 4.2.3 Calendar ............................................................................................. 43 4.2.4 Documents.......................................................................................... 43 4.2.5 Ballots................................................................................................. 43 4.2.6 Action Items ....................................................................................... 43 4.2.7 Email .................................................................................................. 43

NCOIC Activities...................................................................................................... 44 5.1 Technical Council........................................................................................... 44 5.1.1 Customer Requirements Functional Team ......................................... 45 5.1.2 Architecture and Standards Analysis Functional Team ..................... 45 5.1.3 OTS Building Blocks Functional Team ............................................. 46 5.1.4 Education and Outreach Functional Team ......................................... 47 5.1.5 Engineering Processes Functional Team............................................ 47 5.2 Business Council ............................................................................................ 48 5.2.1 Customer Functional Team ................................................................ 49 5.2.2 Consortium Infrastructure Functional Team ...................................... 49 5.2.3 Membership Outreach Functional Team ............................................ 50 5.2.4 Market Strategies Functional Team.................................................... 50 5.2.5 Communications Functional Team..................................................... 51 5.2.6 Legal Functional Team....................................................................... 51 5.2.7 Export Compliance Functional Team................................................. 52 5.2.8 Affiliates Functional Team................................................................. 52 5.3 Executive Council........................................................................................... 53 5.4 Advisory Council............................................................................................ 53 5.5 Affiliate Council ............................................................................................. 53

Technical Work Products.......................................................................................... 54 6.1 Customer Requirements.................................................................................. 54 6.2 Architecture and Standards Analysis.............................................................. 54 6.3 OTS Building Blocks...................................................................................... 55 6.4 Engineering Processes .................................................................................... 55

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Opportunity ............................................................................................................... 56 7.1 Status Quo....................................................................................................... 56 7.2 Basic Integration............................................................................................. 57 7.3 Open Standards Integration ............................................................................ 57 7.4 Interoperability ............................................................................................... 58 7.5 Network-Centric Interoperability ................................................................... 59

Frequently Asked Questions ..................................................................................... 62

List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................... 65

Trademarks.......................................................................................................................... 67 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. 68 Informative References ....................................................................................................... 69

List of Figures Figure 1: Standards Categories ........................................................................................... 22 Figure 2: Open Standards Adoption Curve ......................................................................... 25 Figure 4: Lifecycle .............................................................................................................. 29 Figure 6: Consortium Historical Timeline .......................................................................... 31 Figure 7: Management Company........................................................................................ 32 Figure 8: NCOIC Organization Overview .......................................................................... 34 Figure 10: Technical Council Overview ............................................................................. 36 Figure 12: Business Council Overview............................................................................... 37 Figure 14: Review and Approval Process ........................................................................... 41 Figure 15: Status Quo for System ....................................................................................... 56 Figure 16: Basic Integration................................................................................................ 57 Figure 17: Basic Open Standards Integration ..................................................................... 57 Figure 18: Interoperability .................................................................................................. 58 Figure 19: Network-Centric Interoperability ...................................................................... 60

List of Tables Table 1: The Open Group Management Services ............................................................... 39 Table 3: Membership Structure........................................................................................... 40

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

Executive Summary The Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) was created by its international membership to support all levels of the allied governments to effectively enable NetworkCentric Operations (NCO) to counter the new threat environment we all face in the most rapid manner possible.1 The United States Department of Defense (DoD) is reacting to the challenges of the changing threats to American and allied security with a determination to change the culture of both the military establishment and the supplier community to address this new, largely asymmetric threat environment. The resulting NCO-enabled effort, cumulatively known as â&#x20AC;&#x153;transformationâ&#x20AC;?, intends to result in an elimination of inter-service rivalries together with a corresponding change in the traditional manner by which systems and services are specified, bid, procured, implemented, maintained, and evolved. The NCOIC intends to support three essential goals of transformation: 1.

Prepare the warfighter for information age capabilities,

Continuously enhance systems and services interoperability and operational interdependence,

Reduce the cost of developing new capabilities even as those capabilities became more expansive.

The NCOIC members also believe that the commercial market place can benefit greatly from a similar focus on information superiority and interoperability thereby enhancing global competitiveness.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

The NCOIC is the only broadly-based global industry effort to create such a collaborative technology engineering medium as well as a collaborative business process reengineering medium. Through the NCOIC, its members can jointly develop standards and practices for addressing force transformation and related NCO enablers while, at the same time, vigorously competing for the actual contract vehicles to implement these solutions. The NCOIC compliments and enhances the efforts of the industry associations and the government initiatives behind force transformation and homeland security. Thus, transformation of the military to fully and quickly enable Network-Centric Warfare (NCW), the enhancement of homeland security against all threats, foreign and domestic, and the improvement of industrial enterprise efficiencies are the missions of the NCOIC. As the NCOIC members pursue these goals it is necessary to note that, for most of the 20th Century, militaries frequently led both the development of technology and its applications. NCO in the 21st Century, in contrast, have almost entirely grown out of fundamental changes in industrial societies that have seen the evolution and convergence of economics and business processes with information technology. The NCOIC has tasked itself with demonstrating how this industry convergence can inform and effect force transformation through the employment of interoperability of systems based to the greatest extent possible on the use of well-defined open standards. This tasking can be accomplished by addressing four initial parallel strategies, each of which leverages the considerable amount of effort that has been expended to-date by both industry and government: 1.

NCOIC Strategy 1 – Complete a thorough and rigorous analysis of pertinent government agency architectures, requirements, and mandated open standards to identify commonalities, conflicts, gaps, and areas for potential improvement.

NCOIC Strategy 2 – Complete a broadly inclusive information management overarching architectural framework and continuously identify more open standards, to enable everincreasing degrees of NCO, as rapidly as possible, now and in the future. The overarching architectural framework and open standards must support re-usable solution models that can evolve in the future, and be scaled and/or replicated, rapidly and cost-effectively, for every enterprise.

NCOIC Strategy 3 – Use the open standards-based architectural framework to facilitate acceleration of the accomplishment of NCO by the implementation of Commercial/Government Off-The-Shelf (COTS/GOTS) and other open source products whenever possible, and to encourage the future development of additional open source items in the future.

NCOIC Strategy 4 – Develop a program for education and outreach to continuously increase the awareness, adoption, and use of the open standards identified by NCOIC, and the necessity to change traditional thinking, approaches, and cultures, to further accelerate NCO.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

vii

This document provides further insight into the NCOIC strategies as they relate to NCO. It also offers an introduction to the organization and operations of the NCOIC as the vehicle to carry out those strategies. Toward that end this document is divided into the following sections:

viii

•

Section 1: Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) This section provides an overview of the NCO landscape and the NCOIC position, vision, and mission with respect to that landscape.

•

Section 2: Guiding Principles This section highlights some of the NCOIC principles: net-centricity, interoperability, open standards, building blocks, and others, which will guide NCOIC in carrying out its mission.

•

Section 3: NCOIC Background This section provides a historical perspective, outlining the significant NCOIC activities from inception to formation.

•

Section 4: The NCOIC Organization This section presents a brief overview of the NCOIC organization model, operations, and collaboration tools, and while it is current at the publication of this Position Paper, it should be noted that the organizational model and operations defined in the NCOIC Charter’s and Procedures document take precedence over this Section 4.

•

Section 5: NCOIC Activities This section lists the charters and key activities for each of the NCOIC Councils (Technical, Business, Executive, Advisory, and Affiliate) and where applicable for their underlying functional teams.

•

Section 6: Technical Work Products This section describes the current set of NCOIC work products needed to achieve network-centric interoperability using industry best practices and extensive use of open standards. The deliverables defined in this section characterize the kind of work products that will be produced. They are illustrative, but not exhaustive and they are expected to evolve as the NCOIC evolves.

•

Section 7: Opportunity This section describes the potential opportunities that exist for applying the recommendations related to open standards, integration, and interoperability that are promoted by the NCOIC.

•

Appendix A: Frequently Asked Questions This appendix provides some answers to frequently asked questions regarding the NCOIC.

•

Appendix B: List of Acronyms This appendix provides a list of the acronyms used throughout this Position Paper.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Please note that this Position Paper, with respect to the NCOIC organization and operations material, represents a snapshot as of the publication date of this version of the Position Paper (March, 2005).

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) Industry working together with our customers to provide a net-centric environment where all classes of information systems interoperate by integrating existing and emerging open standards into a common evolving global framework that employs a common set of principles and processes. More information is available at www.ncoic.org.

1.1

Current State of Government Systems From the initial foundations of every country, governments have continuously evolved to support the changing needs of their people and interaction with others around the world. To this end, the governments’ processes have changed too. The earliest government offerings addressed specific needs. Over time, new agencies and programs were created, each satisfying new needs, each with their own requirements. Consequently, the variety of systems and business processes that exists today is large and diverse. Governments have realized the effect of historical trends and are aggressively moving out to make related systems interoperate and to consolidate business processes; e.g., Network-Centric Operations (NCO), Navy Convergence, Defense Integrated Military Human Resources Systems (DIMHRS), Defense Logistics Agency Integrated Data Environment (DLA IDE), etc. With this realization comes a movement to not only modernize global government systems and business processes, but also to modernize the supplier community across the world. NCOIC will work hand-in-hand with governments of the U.S. and its allies to assist in the modernization, which will increase interoperability both in system and business processes. As NCOIC members represent a significant portion of the governments’ supplier base, NCOIC is uniquely positioned to realize the governments’ network-centric vision. Properly executed, NCOIC will identify standards and their patterns of use vis-a-vis interoperability so that increased levels of interoperability may be achieved as quickly as possible. These standards will serve as the basis for interoperable products and services in the future. It is the intent of NCOIC members, where possible, to incorporate the standards and interoperability principles in future offerings. However, prior to outlining the NCOIC goals, it is important to understand the context of global government operations as they are today.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

1.1.1

Government’s Changing Business Models Traditional Department of Defense/Ministry of Defense (DoD/MoD) and civilian systems procurements have focused on the unique requirements of particular programs. This procurement model has echoed program requirements. These models facilitated the procurement of individual systems or weapons platforms. As a result of system/warfighting nodes being procured in this way, interoperability was often devised after-the-fact, at implementation time. Network-centric business models prescribe that interoperability should be brought in at design time; i.e., when systems are procured. Such a procurement approach is required to achieve the central tenet of NCO – systems that are networked together and subsequently interoperate, provide a vast improvement over isolated systems, sensors, and decision-making tools. While Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) is commonly recognized as the correct vision, many programs today still struggle to network effectively. Contemporary programs/platforms were designed to be effective by themselves. Hence most interoperability occurs after the platforms are built, when they are weaved together. This approach, while well intentioned, has some fundamental limitations.

1.1.2

Changing Nature of Government and Military Operations Older models of warfare prescribed a capability to prosecute a “two-theater” war. The enemy (or enemies) would advance in large numbers traversing open spaces – land, sea, or air. In order to protect our interests, the U.S. and its allies developed the capability to field overwhelming force and to direct it at the advancing enemy. The two-theater model of warfare worked well with enemies who were identifying themselves with large force footprints. As with most paradigm shifts, change did not occur immediately. Even prior to 9/11, the U.S. and its allies began to retool their thinking as inadequacies in the old model became evident. Incidents such as train bombings in Spain, Khobar Towers, the Cole, and the first World Trade Center attack, were all non-traditional threats – they were asymmetric. 9/11 was the inflection point precipitating a radical overhaul in the U.S. government and its allies’ thinking and prosecution of warfare. Post 9/11 the U.S. and its allies understood that its traditional warfighting model had favored a deeply hierarchical command and control structure. However, the current asymmetric threat emanated from a networked enemy. Immediately the military began to adapt and overcome – fielding coalitions, quick strike forces, and favoring joint operations. As with any very large organization, there continues to be huge momentum with the pre-existing tools of warfare; e.g., weapons. Most weapons, although developed with pinpoint accuracy, were still designed to mete out massive firepower of overwhelming force. The military quickly concluded that networkenabled weapons were a necessity and hence they were put on the fast track. Warfighters themselves began to demand weapons containing highly sophisticated components with an inherent capability to network. The business of warfighting is becoming more about an interoperation advantage and less about the procurement of the next largest weapon. While the tip of the spear will always be seen as the weapon, the effectiveness of weapons hardware is now substantially moderated by the systems driving it.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

According to the U.S. Secretary of Defense: “…possibly the single-most transforming thing in our forces will not be a weapons system, but a set of interconnections and a substantially enhanced capability because of that awareness.” U.S. Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld The U.S. DoD is one example where the platform approach has been overtaken by the need for a seamlessly connected warfighting system. At the same time, the balance of power is shifting to combatants who can quickly prosecute missions, with interoperability being the overwhelming advantage in that regard. Hence the DoD has launched NCW as the solution to the next generation of warfighting strategies. This change can also be seen elsewhere in government – first responders, integrated intelligence, etc. The U.S. government is very much aware of the historical impediments to consolidated service delivery as evidenced by massive consolidation of its back-office; e.g., DoD Business Management Modernization Program (BMMP), DIMHRS, etc. Government directives now force systems into similar development and usage models. The examples below show that the Federal Government is directing consolidation and integration of its delivery services: •

President’s 21 e-government initiatives,

•

Enterprise architecture requirements across federal systems,

•

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) and metadata directive out of the DoD,

•

Global Information Grid (GIG) and network-centricity desire a common computing platform,

•

Navy Convergence,

•

Total Asset Visibility.

The Federal Government has realized the limitations of older architectures and is aggressively moving out to consolidate, integrate, and ensure interoperability of its delivery systems. Specific branches of government have outlined their pain points more visibly. The DoD, Intelligence Community, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), given their current wartime mission, endeavor to make sweeping changes immediately. These branches find that defending the homeland and prosecuting conflicts globally requires end-to-end control of their systems. Given the urgency, these organizations (both the U.S. and its allies) will be the focal point of NCOIC efforts. Later efforts will extend the framework to civilian and commercial enterprises.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

1.1.3

Department of Defense (DoD) Challenge The following quote by the U.S. Secretary of Defense succinctly states the current DoD need for transformation. Our previous threat posture of large conventional wars has been overtaken by asymmetrical threats. “I remember on September 11th and shortly thereafter I was frequently asked whether or not we could really continue to try to transform the Department of Defense if we were engaged in a global war against terrorism. We not only can do both, we have to do both. We are in a new security environment, and unless we transform this institution, we will not be able to provide the security for the American people that it's our job to do.” U.S. Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld Asymmetrical threats are frequently, and increasingly, not from nation states as has been the case historically. Instead, we see threats that – while certainly fanatical and even suicidal – are also highly agile, internationally franchised, and never centrally controlled. These threats are increasingly technically sophisticated. The threats arise from individuals and groups that are capable of rapidly adapting to the strategies and tactics of the U.S. government and its allies around the world. According to the Office of Force Transformation: “Increasingly, these threats have at their disposal asymmetric, inexpensive, and competitive methods of creating large-scale effects.” Office of Force Transformation, Washington DC The ability of traditionally organized militaries to counter asymmetric attacks, and to mitigate the results of those attacks when they happen, is currently limited by their strategies, tactics, training, and systems, most of which were designed for other purposes. These limitations demand that modern military organizations be transformed along the lines of the fundamental tenets of NCW, and the civil application NCO. NCW/NCO, in several manifestations, offers the key to countering the asymmetric terrorist threats of today. Evidence strongly indicates that the swift military successes by U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the impediments placed before terrorists by security services and law enforcement since 9/11, are working, due significantly to the ongoing process of transformation at the DoD that was well underway before 9/11. The goal of transformation is to ensure that the U.S. military retains an overwhelming competitive advantage over any potential adversary, including the more “traditional” potential enemies as well as the emerging asymmetric threat. This goal is to be achieved by turning the military away from the 20th century platform-centric model of dedicated DoD-initiated and directed programs to a 21st century information-centric model, based largely on technology developments and applications already in use by industry. However, as important as the realization of the need for something like NCW among senior military and DoD civilian personnel is, the emerging reality of NCW has been made possible by a 180-degree shift in the way technology influences military affairs. For most of the 20th century, militaries frequently led both the development of technology and its applications. NCW, in contrast, has almost entirely grown out of fundamental changes in American society (as well as technologically

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

savvy societies around the world) that have seen the evolution and convergence of economics and business processes with information technology. According to Vice Admiral Arthur Cebrowski (USN Ret), Former Director of the Office of Force Transformation, this convergence is linked by three themes: 1.

The shift in focus from the platform to the network,

The shift from viewing actors as independent to viewing them as part of a continuously adapting ecosystem,

The importance of making strategic choices to adapt, or even survive, in such changing ecosystems.

While the U.S. DoD has special challenges, post 9/11, DoDs and MoDs around the world have been affected as well. Madrid, Bali, and Istanbul have been but a few of the post-9/11 events that remind us that terrorism is not only globally organized, but also has global impacts. For a network-centric posture to be fully achieved, all DoD/MoDs must be positioned to collaborate and interoperate. 1.1.3.1

Achieving a Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) Posture

Two crucial challenges remain in the force transformation process via NCW. The first is a predominantly technical challenge; i.e., integrating or changing the many disparate information systems used by the various services and intelligence agencies into an interoperable, trusted, combat-quality network. This network will ensure that information, which is needed by battlefield commanders, is trusted and available to help the commander achieve total Situational Awareness (SA). The second is a cultural change. Senior commanders will be able to obtain information from the field, via human sources and intelligent sensors, to ensure that the correct mix of arms is available to the field units to achieve their missions. Commanders and soldiers must change their thinking from activating a physical weapon to leveraging the system of sensors, command and control, shooters, etc. This complex of interacting players is vastly more powerful than singular tactical weapons. Rep. Jim Saxton (R-New Jersey), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threats, and Capabilities, recently addressed the challenges the Pentagon is facing to make NCW and overall force transformation a reality. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The (Defense) department needs to implement its Global Information Grid (GIG) architecture and ensure that all the military services, defense agencies, and field activities have a fundamental understanding of how each of their information technology systems fits into the GIG architecture.â&#x20AC;? Rep. Jim Saxton (R-New Jersey), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, Unconventional Threads, and Capabilities An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

To emphasize the urgency of the need expressed by Congressman Saxton, Lieutenant General William Wallace, USA, who commanded the Army's V Corps that captured Baghdad, testified before Congressman Saxton's committee that: “…a digital divide currently exists between the operational and tactical levels of war. Despite our efforts to realize network-enhanced warfare since Desert Storm, the trigger puller on the ground still cannot tap into the network and realize its benefits. [And] despite all the incredible products at the disposal of my assault command post, we could not get relevant photos, imagery, or joint data down to the soldier level in near real time. The opportunity to exploit intelligence to our advantage, to the advantage of the fire team in contact, was lost.” Lieutenant General William Wallace, USA The transformation to a network-centric environment using open standards will allow the U.S. military to integrate and interoperate its various systems. This interoperability will deliver the capability to flexibly conduct military missions as well as reconfigure its capability as the need arises. Section 1.1.4 asserts that the challenges faced by the intelligence community are very similar.

1.1.4

Intelligence Community Challenge The history of compartmentalization in the intelligence agencies is well known. Networks are air-gapped, analysts work in separate enclaves, and field office operations are relatively autonomous. Traditional thinking on the conduct of intelligence encouraged this operating model. However, given the global threat of a networked enemy, it is now understood that the various puzzle pieces of intelligence are all required to see the threat network. The recently declassified memo “Bin Laden Intent on Striking Within the United States” shows how even having massive amounts of intelligence doesn’t work if it is not joined with other specific information, such as the Phoenix memo about suspicious individuals getting flight training. Efforts are underway to consolidate, contrast, and compare information coming from the wide variety of intelligence sources. However, as evidenced by the weapons of mass destruction debate, the quest for accurate intelligence continues. Of course there are elements, such as human intelligence, or HUMINT, which will always be fraught with reliability problems. However, systemic data and applications compartmentalization have created problems. Because the agencies have traditionally operated in silos, their systems have reflected that business model. Now they endeavor to produce consolidated intelligence and their traditional system architectures are holding them back. Three problems regarding data exist today that would be eased, if not solved, by a networkcentric environment:

•

Data silos,

•

Difficulty of culling large data sets for specific data,

•

Detecting patterns, either known or unknown, in large data sets. NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

If, via network-centricity, data were available to those adequately privileged in a consolidated environment, then conclusions could be drawn across the enterprise. As the Intelligence Community redefines its products, their systems must be agile and responsive enough to redefine business objects and processes, nearly on-the-fly. Business process orchestration is a must. This requirement is similar to the “re-purposing of assets” problem that the military now has as it prosecutes hot spots. A standards-based architecture framework will provide a set of services, which will allow the business of intelligence to be conducted according to whatever the next set of threats may be.

1.1.5

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Challenge The issues and challenges of interoperability among the military services are compounded when the intelligence services, state and local government, fire, police, and emergency responders are factored into the equation for homeland security. There are two major limitations in the manner by which information related to homeland security is exchanged within and among government agencies and departments and among different corporations and academia. First, government lacks a vehicle to communicate critical information between and among agencies. Second, if, and most likely when, another attack against the American homeland occurs, under current circumstances, government lacks an ability to coordinate emergency response activities capable of spanning large geographic areas. The information needed to coordinate these activities is located in disparate applications and data stores that are localized in regional offices. These needs were defined in February 2002, when the Heritage Foundation published “Defending the American Homeland”, which made a series of recommendations to the Federal Government on the priorities for successfully empowering the then-proposed DHS initiatives. The following is the verbatim transcript of Priority #3: “Priority #3: Improve intelligence and information sharing among all levels of government with homeland security responsibilities. The need for better sharing and dissemination of acquired information to all levels of government became clearer in the days following September 11, but improving LEA Intelligence Community cooperation will have far more to do with changing bureaucratic cultures that resist change than with revising current statutes or regulations. The President should direct the appropriate Cabinet Secretaries and officials to work together to create an all-source federal-level information fusion center, to which all intelligence information goes and from which it is disseminated on a need-to-know basis. The DHS Director should develop a cooperative structure for the sharing and disseminating of this information, which will include classified information. Federal funding and training should be targeted to assist state and local LEA information-gathering efforts.”

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

The DHS has some advantages, in that it can procure brand new systems for newly sanctioned functions. However, to integrate all its systems and avail those to first responders, it must have a business backplane that supports end-to-end business functions. Network and systems interoperability is also essential to the DHS. Allied nations, whether they have a formal DHS or not, are subject to the same issues.

1.1.6

Civilian Agencies and Commercial Enterprise Challenge Civilian government agencies suffer from a similar disjointed mission. Citizens must know the intricate operations of the various agencies in order to utilize government services. Efforts, such as the President’s e-government initiative, are underway to consolidate civilian government services along product lines. The civilian side of government suffers from all of the same consolidation problems that the DHS, Intelligence Community, and DoD/MoDs do, albeit less severe. Civilian government is lacking the secrecy of mission that the other three branches require and consequently has the advantage of a common network. However, the other benefits of network-centricity will improve its service delivery offering as well (e.g., common services available throughout the architecture). The President pointed out the benefits of the various civilian agencies working together to deliver consolidated services. His observation launched the e-government initiative for the civilian sector: The President Urges Agencies to Work Together ”Our success depends on agencies working as a team across traditional boundaries to better serve the American people, focusing on citizens rather than individual agency needs … I thank agencies who have actively engaged in cross-agency teamwork, using e-government to create more cost-effective and efficient ways to serve citizens, and I urge others to follow their lead.” Commercial enterprise, at times, finds it a challenge interfacing with government systems. While they may have more recently updated their systems or have less inertia due to smaller size, they still experience difficulty interfacing with government systems. The establishment of a common network-centric operating environment across government will benefit commercial enterprises as well, in that many commercial entities have already moved to a standards-based approach to their environment.

1.1.7

International Considerations

1.1.7.1

Coalitions and Allies

Most nations have an interest in cooperating on global security issues. Individual departments and ministries therefore have a vested interest in accessing common open standards to which they can conform when performing multi-national military and security operations. When friendly and allied nations conduct joint campaigns, the same requirements for safe and secure interoperability necessary for efficient, successful campaigns at the national level must be achieved on an international scale.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Asymmetric threats and development of international security policy will increase the requirement for acting through coalitions. Lessons learned from recent coalition campaigns reinforce the international need for common standards in NCO in the areas of security, intelligence, and capabilities integration. 1.1.7.2

North Atlantic Treaty Organization and Euro-Atlantic Security

In addition to coalitions that form in response to prevailing events, common network-centric open standards benefit standing alliances, particularly the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). With the recent expansion to 26 member nations, the complexity of achieving interoperability in the NATO Response Force is increased. In anticipation of its expansion, and recognizing the need for military transformation, NATO decommissioned Allied Command Atlantic in 2003 and subsequently commissioned Allied Command Transformation. Clearly, the identification of common open standards in NCO benefits individual allied nations and supports NATO at the broader organizational level in its transformation campaign. Furthermore, the sharing of military capabilities between NATO and the European Union was agreed through Berlin. Plus, identification and adoption of common open standards allows Europe to ensure its own headline goals as part of the European Security and Defense Identity should European Union nations conduct joint operations using NATO assets.

1.1.8

Call for Interoperable Governments The examples detailed above demonstrate how all governments can benefit from implementing a network-centric open standards-based architecture framework. Certainly, with the current threat conditions, the immediate focus must be on the DoD/MoDs, Intelligence Community, and DHSs. However, designed properly, an interoperable information backplane will be adoptable by civilian agencies as well. NCOIC has as its core mission assisting global governments in accelerating the adoption of a network-centric environment so that: •

Networks allow clients and servers to communicate in real time seamlessly (e.g., sensorto-shooter response time within enemy’s decision cycle),

•

Software can interoperate via common open standards protocols producing common government-wide services (e.g., supply systems publish their capabilities to material management systems breaking down both organizational and application boundaries),

•

End-to-end government business processes can span system boundaries (e.g., first responders share spectrum and common response procedures),

•

Awareness and visibility across the network become common capabilities (e.g., real-time battle space awareness and total asset visibility).

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

1.2

The Need for NCOIC DoDs and MoDs are reacting to the challenges of the changing threats to security with a determination to change the culture of both the military establishments and the supplier communities to address this new, largely asymmetric threat environment. Called “transformation”, the efforts are intended to result in an elimination of traditional inter-service rivalries (both real and perceived) as well as the traditional manner by which systems and services are specified, bid, procured, implemented, maintained, and evolved. The goals of transformation are to: •

Prepare the warfighter for information age capabilities,

•

Continuously enhance systems and services interoperability and operational interdependence,

•

Reduce the cost of developing new capabilities, even as those capabilities become more expansive.

As the thinking around transformation became more focused in the late 1990s, it became clear that success could only come with the active cooperation and vigorous participation, with and through, the industrial suppliers of goods and services to the DoD/MoDs, and more recently DHSs. Numerous attempts have been made, and are ongoing, through industry associations to provide DoD/MoDs and DHSs with media to make their needs known, as well as media for industry to address those needs. These efforts have been notable, are ongoing and necessary, but are not entirely sufficient to meet the total transformation challenge. NCOIC will develop a complementary, inclusive medium by which broadly-based industry members can work together in an open environment, to identify the building blocks for solutions to actual force transformation problems which are comprehensive and open-standards-based, as well as politically acceptable. Through NCOIC, its members will jointly identify open standards, their patterns of use and interoperation, and common practices, processes, and principles for addressing force transformation and related NCO enablers. Creating a standards-based information backplane will actually increase competition in the vendor community. Instead of segmenting the market, and closing it to whole groups of competitors, this effort will level the playing field so that all can create products to differentiate themselves. These products will be focused on domain solutions, as they will not be recreating the system-level infrastructure each time. NCOIC complements and enhances the efforts of other, ongoing industry and government associations and initiatives behind force transformation and homeland security. NCOIC’s members represent major vendors in the DoD/MoD space for the U.S. and its allies. As such, these vendors can – and will – incorporate the derived open standards wherever possible. This group is uniquely advantaged to both agree upon open standards and subsequently move those back into its product base.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

1.3

Value Creation NCOIC will create value for all pertinent stakeholders:

1.3.1

•

Global government customers,

•

NCOIC membership of large-scale system integrators, platform providers, and product and service companies,

•

Citizens.

The Knowledge Domain NCOIC will build knowledge of NCO, thereby facilitating an understanding of existing and emerging capabilities by:

1.3.2

•

Incorporating the “boundaryless” concept into NCOIC logic,

•

Building understanding of the full NCO landscape – technical and strategic,

•

Building awareness of how NCOIC can enable all aspects of NCO,

•

Creating outreach and educational initiatives to educate the community about NCO technologies, services, and solutions.

The Enablement Domain NCOIC will work to enable network-centric compliant products, services, and processes by fostering innovative NCO concepts and strategies to meet mission challenges. NCOIC will lay the foundation for rapid, agile, and nimble product development aimed at enabling NCO at all levels according to the value stream of each NCOIC member, individually and/or combined. Enabling the creation of network-centric compliant products will provide a stream of compatible technologies for procurement. Transformation to an integrated operating environment will then become a natural progression following the knowledge and enablement tenets.

1.3.3

The Transformation Domain NCOIC will be active in promoting the adoption and implementation of NCOIC concepts. Its active role will assist in transforming current operating environments to NCO via the implementation of NCO concepts and strategies into operational capabilities. NCOIC will:

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

•

Expedite the development, testing, and refinement of concepts and strategies into solutions that are enablers for transformation,

•

Work in close partnership with stakeholders and customers to focus on the development and deployment of mission-capable systems into the NCO architectures,

•

Work with customers to help revise the acquisition processes and transform other institutional barriers.

These three key tenets describe how NCOIC will translate its activities into a positive impact on each stakeholder community. The realized value will vary according to the goals of the particular organizations involved. Section 1.7 describes how each major set of stakeholders will realize value within their domain.

1.4

NCOIC Vision The NCOIC vision is: Industry working together with our customers to provide a network-centric environment where all classes of information systems interoperate by integrating existing and emerging open standards into a common evolving global framework that employs a common set of principles and processes. The four primary tenets of NCOIC’s vision are closely interlinked:

1.5

The development of a network-centric environment,

The enablement of interoperability,

The use of open standards,

The establishment of common principles and processes.

NCOIC Mission The NCOIC mission is: To help accelerate the achievement of increased levels of interoperability within, and amongst, all levels of government of the United States and its allies involved in joint, interagency, and multi-national (JIM) operations. NCOIC will achieve this mission through the creation of an international industry body, whose membership is open to all interested parties sharing a common vision of facilitating NCO, and whose efforts are directed in support of the respective members’ customers.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

1.6

NCOIC Objectives and Initial Strategies The primary objective of NCOIC is to better enable NCO by identifying common, existing, and emerging open standards, processes, and principles, together with their patterns of use and interoperability. NCOIC will achieve this objective through the creation of a virtual, collaborative environment; the use of commercial and defense best practices; and the leveraging of other activities related to increasing interoperability in a network-centric environment. The identification of common open standards and patterns will not only enable the acceleration of increased interoperability of current and planned systems, but will also facilitate the generation of future system architectures and reference models with increased interoperability already “built-in”. NCOIC will also act as an advocate for transformation and network-centricity and help increase its adoption throughout industry and governments alike. The primary beneficiaries of NCOIC activities will be NCOIC members’ respective customers in the following organizations: •

DoD/MoDs and Intelligence Communities, by: — Helping the warfighter to achieve a network-centric capability to better perform their mission, — Helping to ensure safe, secure, and reliable interoperability during JIM operations.

•

DHSs by: — Increasing the responsiveness and coordination ability of first responders, — Increasing the coordination among federal, state, and local agencies. •

Other Government Agencies by: — Increasing quality, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency of delivery of governmental services.

•

Commercial Enterprises by: — Enhancing global seamless information sharing, — Strengthening competitiveness.

These objectives will be accomplished by addressing the following four parallel strategies, each of which leverages the effort that has been expended to-date by both industry and government agencies.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

NCOIC Strategy 1: Analyze Requirements Complete a thorough and rigorous analysis of pertinent government agency architectures, capability needs, and mandated open standards to identify commonalities, synergies, conflicts, gaps, and potential areas for improvement. Also, in collaboration with the pertinent customers, identify representative, high priority “use cases” to enable NCOIC participants to focus their efforts on critical areas for increased interoperability (potential examples being Sense and Respond Logistics, Blue Force Tracker implementation in the “Last Mile”, etc.). NCOIC Strategy 2: Extend Architectural Concepts Work with our customers to develop an interoperability framework that extends architectural concepts to include open standards and patterns of interoperability that will accelerate the development of NCO. NCOIC Strategy 3: Identify Building Blocks Use the overarching architectural framework to identify the widest possible community of Standards-based Commercial/Government Off-The-Shelf (SCOTS/GOTS) and other open standards-based building blocks, which can be used to accelerate the implementation of NCO. NCOIC Strategy 4: Educate Develop a program for education and outreach to increase the awareness, adoption, and use of the open standards identified by NCOIC, and the understanding of the necessity to change traditional thinking, approaches, and cultures to further accelerate NCO.

1.7

NCOIC Values The primary value of NCOIC is its ability to assist industry and government technology developers and buyers across the globe in changing the way customer systems operate. Catalyzing industry to deliver work products that conform to a common interoperable framework will provide NCOIC members’ customers with an agile operating environment. Done properly, this will translate into a dramatic improvement in the ability of the customer to deliver end-to-end systems unconstrained by service, platform, or system incompatibilities. NCOIC activities are related to functions being performed by other organizations, but are differentiated in the following ways: •

NCOIC’s primary focus is the identification of existing and emerging future open standards and their patterns of interoperation, using systems engineering/network-centric principles in contrast to the development of multiple solution-centric architectures or the creation of new open standards. NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

•

NCOIC will address multiple aspects of interoperability within and amongst all levels of government both for the U.S. and its allies, in contrast to addressing a specific initiative, a specific agency or service, a specific department or ministry, or a specific country.

•

NCOIC will work to incorporate new ideas and will interact closely with appropriate customer advisors to ensure that the specific work products produced by NCOIC are in support of customers’ short and long-range goals, in contrast to providing a forum for the exchange of information and ideas.

Naturally, NCOIC will work closely with all related organizations and external affiliates across the globe to ensure that each mutually benefits from all related work and to eliminate redundant activities while achieving increased levels of interoperability as quickly as possible. The experienced and successful systems integrators and information technology companies coming together is an unparalleled initiative and gives NCOIC a strong opportunity to deliver on the promises outlined in its vision, mission, objectives, and value propositions. Furthermore, the appropriate customer advisors and external affiliates will further strengthen NCOIC’s operations and ensure the appropriate focus and timely accomplishment of such promises.

1.7.1

Value to the Customer – Government The optimum method to address the complexity of the combined national security/homeland security technological challenges, and the attendant political challenges, is a cooperative effort that will provide value to NCOIC’s primary customer stakeholders by fulfilling NCOIC objectives and strategies. In particular, the following benefits will be achieved: •

Interoperability within and amongst systems involved in JIM operations will be increased.

•

Future systems can be specified and designed to have increased interoperability and lower cost supportability as a result of the early identification of the emerging open standards and the technological advances that are anticipated to occur in the future commercial marketplace.

•

Customers will be able to field systems that plug into the network-centric environment more quickly, thereby improving force readiness.

•

Component and system re-use will be maximized. NCOIC will identify the common components needed for the network-centric environment and create and maintain an inventory of interoperable systems, services, and software.

•

Customer systems will be able to bring more domain-specific capabilities to the warfighter more quickly, as new development can focus primarily on domain capabilities, with the network-centric environment providing the backplane upon which to implement them.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

•

Access will be provided to NCOIC members and leaders to: — Assist the customers in the generation of emerging interoperable architectures, — Contribute to force transformation efforts.

1.7.2

•

Access to an industry-developed information management methodology that enables NCO and accelerates interoperability will support a re-usable solution model that can be costeffectively scaled and cloned for each enterprise. By having a “template” methodology, disparate development efforts can be synchronized, and common touch-points and checkpoints can be developed to ensure interoperability as products are built, thereby reducing the risk inherent in large integration projects.

•

Acceleration of new development based on an environment where parts are interchangeable, resulting in more competition, and increased product quality.

•

Battle space SA will be dramatically improved as elements operate together in increased harmony.

Value to Large-Scale Integrators and Platform Providers NCOIC will bring industry and government solution sets closer together to enable both bodies to be self-synchronized, thereby enabling the rapid integration and development of solutions. This will result in solution sets that are compliant with government requirements, which in turn will lower integration costs. The following benefits are also anticipated:

•

Lower development costs resulting from industry being able to focus on domain-specific requirements, as the infrastructure issues will have been addressed and provided by the network-centric environment,

•

Increased ability to compete in larger addressable markets due to the architectural characteristics of “plug & play” interchangeable solutions,

•

Decreased time-to-market solution sets resulting from the shorter lifecycle dependencies, which will also drive down the cost of integration,

•

Lower integration risk as solution components will have been previously tested, integrated, and proven,

•

Once solutions can truly be divided into components, companies can draw upon some components that have already been developed and proven outside of government, thereby increasing return on those investments,

•

Leveraging mature commercial development processes and methodologies to bring uniformity and consistency across systems development by various groups and organizations; this will promote re-usability and enhance maintainability, which will reduce implementation costs.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

1.7.3

Value to Product and Service Companies As a result of the current heterogeneity of infrastructure environments, product and services companies are forced to choose between two equally discouraging paths: 1.

Create their products on multiple platforms via multiple code bases and/or solutions,

Specialize in one infrastructure environment and lose out on the remainder of the addressable market.

NCOIC will help determine a broad consensus of approaches to customer architecture issues, which will result in:

1.7.4

•

Reduced investment in proprietary solutions,

•

Faster product lifecycles due to reliance on a standard interoperability backplane,

•

New and/or larger addressable markets, including international markets, resulting from the acceptance and use of an increasing number of standards across the globe.

Value to Citizens NCOIC activities, through a coordinated industry approach, will help enable multiple governments and their agencies to achieve increased interoperability. The value to citizens includes: •

Improved efficiency of government spending as a greater proportion of funds will be spent on accomplishing stated missions and promises rather than infrastructure,

•

The diffuse but individual benefit of increased personal and national security,

•

Increased trust in elected officials.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

Guiding Principles For NCOIC to be successful, it must abide by well-founded guiding principles as mentioned in the NCOIC vision (see Section 1.4). These guiding principles create a cohesive and focused environment for product development, and aid in bolstering the implementation of the vision, mission, and goal of NCOIC. Additionally, these principles will accelerate implementation of various government initiatives of Network-Centric Operations (NCO) and build a viable business case for other stakeholders. The essence of the guiding principles is depicted in the following subsections, which categorically define the objectives and their importance to NCOIC.

2.1

Network-Centricity Network-centricity is not just connectivity across systems or nodes, but between people in the information and cognitive domains. It stresses the shared information and Situational Awareness (SA) that leads to increased speed of command and synchronized effects in the battle space, commercial, and financial environments, to cite a few. In summary, network-centricity is technical, operational, and behavioral, and it applies to commercial, military, and civil government operations, and has been the driving force behind the ongoing transformation of commercial business operations.

2.1.1

Network-Centric Concepts for Military Applications The network-centric principle has been adopted by the U.S. DoD for the transformation of the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s warfighting forces in the information age. This principle will enable the DoD to provide the warfighter with the information and decision superiority envisioned by Joint Vision 2020 (www.dtic.mil/jv2010/jvpub.htm). Network-centric concepts are also embraced by the international community, including the various MoDs. The network-centric concept defines all battlefield elements as connected via an integrated, distributed, digital information and communication system for the sharing of critical real-time data. Network-centricity is a transformation enabler that empowers all users with the ability to transparently discover, access, share, integrate, correlate, disseminate, and fuse data/information that supports their mission objectives. Network-centricity will provide the military personnel with dramatic improvement in the survivability, lethality, speed, timeliness, and responsiveness of its warfighting forces. It does this via: â&#x20AC;˘

A shared SA and shared knowledge of the battlefield environment, NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

•

Enhanced capabilities for real-time collaboration,

•

Rapid decisions and distribution of commander’s intent.

NCO and Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) are the embodiment of the network-centric principle that will reduce the “Fog of War” that has traditionally hampered the battlefield. One of the features that will significantly reduce the Fog of War is shared SA that will enable timely collaboration and self-synchronization, resulting in enhanced visibility of the battlefield situation instantaneously including sustainability, and enhanced speed of command resulting in dramatically increased mission effectiveness. Shared SA enables the digitized forces to fight successfully over larger areas with fewer forces. SA is increased for all critical elements in the battlefield, from global and regional commanders through to individual warfighters. The substantial improvement in shared situational understanding, battlefield knowledge, and seamless communications enables real-time collaboration between battlefield commanders and operational centers, resulting in faster decisions and a broader spectrum of available Courses of Action (CoA). The faster decisions are due in part to the decrease in “cognitive loading” of humans-in-control, who now have access to the pertinent knowledge, filtered for the decision processes for which they are responsible. The commander’s intent is easily and quickly disseminated to all relevant parties. The high quality, shared SA is essential to these rapid, effective battlefield decisions. Implementing the network-centric principle requires that a critical mass of the joint force elements be robustly networked. This means that the majority of all elements and platforms in the engagement must be interoperable and active on the network. NCO will enhance the DoD’s capability to preserve global peace and dominate adversaries across the spectrum of military operations with increased audacity and reduced risk. The information advantage goes to the warfighter.

2.1.2

Network-Centric Concepts for Commercial Applications Successful businesses have already learned that key to growth in the information age is the ability to create value and make profit in the most efficient and productive manner possible. In the commercial sector, the source of value creation is functionality, reliability, convenience, and cost. In many ways the military concepts of NCO are being spearheaded by the commercial enterprises, which have adopted the information age to their businesses. Examples of commercial uses of the network-centric concept include: •

Travel industry (asset tracking, resource tracking, reservation systems, peak load),

•

Financial industry (transactions, transfer of assets, collaboration, wealth management, trading, peak load),

•

Transportation industry (tracking, air cargo, supply chain, inventory, mobile),

•

Retail industry (store disconnection, bulk data updates, automatic restocking, auction).

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

In the civil government area, efforts are underway to transform the government to a citizencentered, results-oriented, and market-based organization. This is being implemented by a government-wide integrated information technology approach utilizing network-centric concepts. The efforts are focused on providing improvements in a number of areas: budget allocation, information sharing, performance measurements, budget/performance integration, cross-agency collaboration, improved service to the citizen, and e-government.

2.2

Interoperability Effective interoperability of systems is a goal of the government as well as commercial business. As systems continue to increase in complexity and quantity, a practical strategy must be adopted for achieving interoperability. There are strategic motives that drive interoperability including: •

Responding to fiscal constraints,

•

Preparing for joint operations between organizations,

•

Modernization of processes,

•

Changing skills market.

Likewise, there are tactical motives for interoperability including: •

Migration from legacy or unsupported technologies,

•

Adoption of open standards,

•

Creating unified access to persistent data,

•

Creating a service-oriented environment,

•

Creating time-critical applications,

•

Reducing system complexity and costs.

The words “interoperability” and “integration” are sometimes used interchangeably, but there is a distinction. Information technology systems (applications and infrastructure) can interoperate because the technical integration infrastructure is in place. Interoperability is semantic and integration is technical. For example, enabling two systems to exchange data is technical integration. Sharing semantics about data operations and data schemas is interoperability. To expect a significant amount of interoperability, a greater amount of technical integration semantics is required.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

The general approach to interoperability based on multiple technical integration techniques is outlined below: •

Define objectives in terms of the effects of integration on the organization: Interoperability, integration, and general information technology transformation are most effective when addressed using a holistic approach to issues including skills; culture; customers; systems, network, and operations architectures; standards; existing applications; co-existence and migration plan; replication and backup; reduction in complexity; alignment with overall business and information technology transformation plans.

2.3

•

Analyze existing systems for technical integration,

•

Benchmark technical integration proof-of-concepts,

•

Define new architectures considering benchmark results,

•

Define new and integrated applications based on architectures.

Open Standards Information, data and process flow, and the ability to mix and match products and services are predicated on the adoption of a common set of open standards across the industry. Progress in both areas will be assisted by agreement on the right standards to implement, support from the industry, and certification programs to ensure conformance. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) defines a standard as a document, established by consensus and approved by a recognized body, that provides, for common and repeated use, rules, guidelines, or characteristics for activities or their results, aimed at the achievement of the optimum degree of order in a given context. ISO’s characterization of the value of standards to customers is: “(Standards) contribute to making life simpler, and to increasing the reliability and effectiveness of the goods and services we use.” The power of NCOIC lies in its ability to gain consensus on which standards to use, and not in creating new standards.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

2.3.1

Standards Categories Standards fall into five basic categories: 1.

Emerging Standards – Newly formed specifications that show promise for broad open application.

Open Standards – Specifications developed through a consensus process and made available for use by any vendor or implementer.

De Jure Standards– Specifications approved by a formal standards organization, such as ISO and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC); this term is often used to describe standards adopted by a government and to which conformance is often mandated.

De Facto Standards – Specifications adopted as a result of widely accepted practice or common use.

Proprietary Standards – Specifications controlled by one or a few people and organizations. emerging standards Open Standards de jure standards de facto standards proprietary

Figure 1: Standards Categories

The categories above are related, and standards can move from one to another. Open standards have three additional aspects: •

Requires a specification: — Standard, just one specification, — Non-proprietary, — Free, no royalty flow for “from-scratch” implementations.

•

Implementations should be available: — Multiple implementations are best, — Competitive and revenue-generating implementations, — One reference implementation with documentation and testing.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

•

Conformance/Validation/Certification should be documented: — A single common understanding of what conformance means, — Non-proprietary and reasonable costs for conformance certification.

2.3.2

Common Principles Enabled by Standardization Standardization can be done in many areas of an information technology system. Some of the areas frequently addressed by standardization include:

2.3.3

•

Interoperability – Allows systems to network together.

•

Integration – Allows systems to share data or services.

•

Scalability – Support for a large number of users and systems across varying size computing platforms.

•

Portability – Permits applications to be independent of hardware and systems software through stable Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and services for programmers.

•

Usability – Addresses user interfaces, user access, manageability, and flexibility.

•

Quality – Through stability, reliability, and security.

•

Virtualization – Allows applications and infrastructure to be accessed with similar techniques.

•

Legacy Support – Flexibility, transition, and migration to a new paradigm by addressing the legacy as a path to the future. Permit a gradual replacement of legacy platforms and components that cannot support the new paradigm shift.

•

Development – Lifecycle model, implementation, and deployment of a solution.

Principles for Standardization Some additional principles that drive standards efforts include: •

Offerings based on relevant industry standards,

•

Both de jure and de facto,

•

Open process to actively solicit inputs and technology,

•

Timely, vendor-neutral decision processes,

•

Early and equal access to specifications and software,

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

2.3.4

•

Hardware-independent implementation,

•

Scalable to big and small systems, specialized and mass markets,

•

Technical innovation through universities and research centers,

•

Reasonable and stable terms for licensing.

Key Benefits of Open Standards Open standards are developed through a consensus process and made available for use by any company or organization. NCOIC shall endeavor, whenever practical, to identify and favor open standards rather than proprietary or non-open standards. Proprietary specifications may be considered where no open standard exists. The value of the standard is measured in terms of its usefulness, market adoption, and by the degree of control that is retained or relinquished by the originator. The adoption of open standards offers the best chance of achieving interoperability and integration. Wide adoption creates a level playing field in the market, offers a wider selection of products, and fosters an environment where customers will buy products because they are confident in the future of the product. Increased revenue provides the means for the industry to prosper and invest in new systems. Using standards-based products has general benefits:

•

Improves the ability to interoperate with other standards-based products,

•

Reduces procurement complexity,

•

Extends the lifetime of purchased products,

•

Simplifies bid analysis,

•

Reduces integration time and costs,

•

Reduces or removes the need for conformance testing,

•

Provides an information technology system that is ready for expansion and migration with newly certified products,

•

Fosters healthy competition that benefits suppliers and customers,

•

Healthy competition leads to many strong participants and technological progress and business efficiencies,

•

Unhealthy competition leads to monopoly and technology stagnation. NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

There are also supplier-specific benefits: •

Reduced/shared development costs,

•

Larger markets,

•

Fewer false starts,

•

Freedom for innovation and differentiation,

•

Broader skills market.

And there are customer-specific benefits:

2.3.5

•

Freedom of choice (no lock-in) = value for investment,

•

Reduced deployment and lifecycle risks.

Open Standards Adoption The open standards adoption curve is similar to the adoption of most technology or change, as shown in Figure 2: Consortium

Techies Try it!

Pragmatists Stick with the pack.

Procrastinators What if we do nothing?

Visionaries Ahead of the pack. Skeptics No way!

Innovators

early adopters

early majority

late majority

laggards

Figure 2: Open Standards Adoption Curve

NCOIC members are visionaries in the drive to network-centric transformation, cautioned by the ability to adopt widely accepted and/or commercially successful open standards.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

2.4

Open Source The open source movement is having an impact on all aspects of the information technology industry, including standards organizations. What happens when you combine the concepts of open source and standards? Open source describes the way a software product is developed and released. An open source development allows individuals to freely contribute and share the code base. An open source software project could have started from a specification or a standard, or an open source project could have started from an implementation. If there are goals that surround the open source project that deal with re-use and interoperability, then it is likely that standards are needed in order for the open source implementation to have lasting value. For example, if an open source implementation of a directory service doesn’t support standard directory service requests, then its usefulness is limited. Sustainable open source implementations will have standards associated with them, regardless of whether the standard was developed first, or derived by the implementation. If standards are important, buyers should demand certification of conformance to those standards and interoperability of the products that support the standard. In short, open source is a process to deliver software, and standards are a model for software behavior. Some current thinking on open source follows: •

Open source spurs innovation,

•

Open source does not replace the need for standards,

•

Open source does not make software free,

•

Open source and standards are complementary,

•

Standards do not conflict with open source.

There is great potential value-add to the industry when open source and standards come together, each playing its specific role.

2.5

Patterns Patterns describe a solution to a recurring problem. A pattern expresses a relation between a certain context, a problem, and a solution. A pattern may be discovered in the collaboration of people or within procedures, for example.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Typically some person (or a group) identifies the recurrence of the problem and the solution and formally documents the participants, their interactions, and the context. Some patterns are best captured as guidance and persist in the form of documentation of a methodology. Other patterns may be implemented with automation. The value of patterns include the ability to enable organizations to seek improved quality and productivity, consistency across development efforts, continuing communication and the establishment of best practices, improved governance, and architectural control. In addition, using patterns in daily activities reduces the mundane, improves productivity and quality, and leaves more opportunity for the creative effort to be applied to competitive differentiators.

2.6

Certified Products Standards and patterns alone are not enough. Claims by a supplier that their product conforms to a standard are good. However, this gives the customer no real power of enforcement or redress if conformance problems arise, other than the goodwill they have with their supplier. A product that is certified by a reputable, independent, third-party authority provides verification to back the vendor’s claims that a product conforms to the applicable standard(s). It also enables suppliers to assert and substantiate claims that their certified product does conform to the applicable standard(s). The best programs in operation today require vendors to assert the following:

2.7

•

The certified product conforms to the applicable standard.

•

The certified product will remain conformant throughout its life.

•

If a non-conformance is discovered, the vendor guarantees that the product will be fixed (that is, made conformant) in a timely manner.

Building Blocks Whenever possible, NCOIC will seek to encourage the use of appropriate building blocks including Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS), Government Off-The-Shelf (GOTS), Standardsbased COTS (SCOTS) systems, and open source technology in implementing components in the development of new architectures for all platforms. COTS systems include all commercially available hardware and software systems, while GOTS includes all hardware and software systems developed specifically for a government program and made available for use in other programs.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

As an example of its importance, many U.S. government agencies, including the DoD under its Strategic Acquisition Initiative (SAI), mandate that contractors must first consider COTS in program development for new technology insertions and upgrades. This is a paradigm shift for the government where previously nearly all government systems were developed on a one-of-akind basis. The use of such systems has many measurable benefits. The benefits most often cited are cost reduction and faster development. Cost and time-to-market are reduced because new platform developers do not expend effort in duplicating existing technology. Cost reduction even extends to the training of personnel where pre-existing courses may be utilized. Another benefit is the greater reliability of systems that have already had their problems identified and corrected through extensive usage. Perhaps the greatest benefit is the ability to take advantage of advances in technology in a more timely manner. For example, the product lifecycle of a COTS system is typically approximately two years and shrinking, while the typical government program lifecycle is more than 20 years. By taking advantage of the shorter development cycles, government systems should be able to be incrementally refined and improved over time rather than implementing entirely new systems at substantially long time intervals. NCOIC will encourage and facilitate the use of building blocks including COTS and GOTS systems. The objective is that these building blocks will be shown to be interoperable. NCOIC as a part of its activities (see Section 5) will investigate different methods and approaches for encouraging such use and for achieving the objective of interoperability.

2.8

Lifecycle The NCOIC vision includes addressing processes. The lifecycle of a system consists of the stages followed from requirements through change management. These stages are methodologyspecific and are summarized in Figure 3. This is an abbreviated list of stages. For example, testing typically includes unit testing, functional testing, integration testing, regression testing, performance testing, and system testing. It is common for architectures to focus on the technical, operational, and system view of systems â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the run-time or execution environments. Open standards now address more and more parts of the entire lifecycle.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Traceability links

Mission Mission and and Business Business Modeling Modeling

Information Information Technology Technology Modeling Modeling

Development Development Wrapping Wrapping Orchestration Orchestration

Application Application Management Management Deployment Deployment) Deployment) Systems Systems Management Management

Requirements Architecture Simulation Design Implementation Testi ng Install Configure Operate Monitor Manage Change

Model Driven

Figure 3: Lifecycle

Figure 3 is best interpreted from a tooling view. As the stages of the lifecycle progress, open standards-based artifacts (e.g., Extensible Markup Language (XML)) are created. The tools interpret the artifacts and then provide traceability links between each stage. This is commonly refereed to as the “round trip”. As one stage updates the artifacts, the previous or next stage can understand the changes. Model Driven Architecture (MDA) is a maturing approach to formalizing the lifecycle. Tools will enable mission/business modeling, information technology modeling, orchestration (workflow), deployment, and systems management. The artifact representation is Unified Modeling Language (UML) Version 2. Formal and open representations allow, for example, simulation to occur early in the lifecycle (i.e., before significant amounts of the application are written). In addition to MDA, the development of the actual tools is being standardized. The benefits of open standards tools include: •

Tools can be extended where needed.

•

Automated support for specialized stages can be added.

•

Semantic artifacts can be shared.

•

The dependency on non-semantic simple drawing tools is removed.

•

Eclipse – a widely accepted open source tools development activity – supports these benefits and is going through standardization.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

NCOIC Background This section describes the significant NCOIC activities from inception to formation.

3.1

Historical Start-Up Carl O'Berry originated the concept for NCOIC in late 2000 when he was Vice President and General Manager for Boeing’s Government Information and Communications Systems organization. The consortium concept evolved over the next two years until 2002, when Boeing began sharing the consortium vision with industry and government. Boeing approached several aerospace and information technology companies to discuss the idea of the consortium and to solicit participation, resulting in the signature of a “Letter of Intent” by 16 companies, including Boeing, between December 2002 and October 2003. An initial kick-off meeting was hosted by Boeing in Washington DC, November 4-5 2003. The meeting attendees were organized into three working teams: 1.

Executive Team, which discussed possible consortium parameters,

Organization Team (a.k.a. Strategy Team), which discussed organization planning,

Technical Team, which discussed the technical plan for the way forward.

The meeting participants created and agreed to a consortium vision statement. The critical points of this vision were open standards, network-centricity, interoperability, and common processes. An agreement was made to meet again in the near future after forming multi-company working groups to evaluate elements of the proposed consortium plan.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Marcomm Legal Org Model Membership Model Voting Model Fall 2000 Initial Concept

2002 -2003 16 Companies

Nov 2003 1st Meeting D.C. Host: Boeing

The Open Group hired

Dec 2003 2nd Meeting Anaheim Host: Boeing

Feb 2004 3rd Meeting Menlo Park Hosts: Sun, HP, Cisco

Collaboration online

Position Paper Draft

Apr 2004 4th Meeting St. Petersburg Host: Raytheon

New Members Join

Position Paper V1.0

Jun 2004 5th Meeting Anaheim Host: Boeing

2004 Official kickoff National Press club

Aug 2004 6th Meeting N.Y. Host: IBM

Figure 4: Consortium Historical Timeline

The second meeting was hosted by Boeing and held in Anaheim, December 17, 2003. All 16 of the member companies were in attendance. The meeting continued with presentations from the three teams. The Executive Team agreed to proceed further and requested the Organization Team to look for a consortium management company, which could take care of day-to-day operation of the consortium. The Technical Team was assigned to create a process for developing the vision and formulating a roadmap with resource requirements for carrying out such a task. The Organization Team was further assigned to look into the legal issues related to forming the consortium and was asked to create a roadmap and identify resource requirements for creating an organizational hierarchy and enabling consortium members to share intellectual property. The vision statement refinement was assigned to a Marketing Communication Team in conjunction with the Organization Team. The third meeting was hosted by Sun, Hewlett-Packard, and Cisco at Sun Microsystemsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; facility in Menlo Park CA, February 18, 2004. This meeting was attended by all participating companies. The Executive Team approved the selection of The Open Group as the consortium management company and a start-up team was formed to facilitate smooth transition to The Open Group. Subsequently, Kavi was selected as the collaboration tool and portal provider for the consortium. The Marketing Communication Team was asked to facilitate the search for a consortium name and to plan the media relations activities required to publicly announce the formation of the consortium. The resource requirements and a short-term roadmap were presented to the Executive Team by both the Organization and Technical Teams, which were altered and modified by the Executive Team to balance out the resource requirements and nearterm needs. The fourth meeting was hosted by Raytheon in St. Petersburg, April 22, 2004. The fifth meeting was hosted by Boeing in Newport Beach, June 22, 2004. The formal NCOIC kick-off took place at the National Press Club in Washington DC, September 28, 2004. An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

3.2

Initial Members The following companies were members of the NCOIC at the date of launch (September 28, 2004): BAE Systems

Ericsson

Innerwall

Rockwell Collins

Boeing

Factiva

L3 Communications

SAAB AB

CACI

Finmeccania

Lockheed Martin

SAIC

Carrillo Business Systems

General Dynamics

Microsoft

Smiths

Cisco

Hewlett-Packard

Northrop Grumman

Sun Microsystems

EADS

Honeywell

Oracle

Thales

EMC

IBM

Raytheon

Themis Computer

As of publication of this Position Paper (March 2005), over 53 companies had become members of the NCOIC.

3.3

Selection of The Open Group The initial members included a wide variety of large-scale defense integrators, Tier 1 suppliers, information technology companies, and management consultants. This wide range of business experience and expertise led the group to determine, from the outset, that a non-affiliated, neutral third party was needed to oversee operations for both the start-up and operational phases. Beginning in November 2003, a number of organizations were invited to propose their solutions for rapid start-up and ongoing operations. Each was carefully evaluated on their experience with operating other consortia, their contacts within government organizations demanding NetworkCentric Operations (NCO) and Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) solutions, their particular skills and capabilities, their cultural fit with the mission of NCOIC, and their fee structures.

Figure 5: Management Company

An Evaluation Team recommended that The Open Group be selected as the management services provider, and the Executive Team adopted that recommendation at the February 18, 2004 meeting. The Open Group led the evaluation in all areas. Key factors included its Architecture Development Methodology (ADM) and consulting services supporting the method,

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

its track record in government information management circles, its global reach, and the collaboration toolkit provided by its partner, Kavi.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

The NCOIC Organization This section provides a brief overview of the NCOIC organization model and operations. Note:

4.1

This description is accurate at the time of writing and approval of this Position Paper. However, the document â&#x20AC;&#x153;Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC) Charters and Proceduresâ&#x20AC;? (www.ncoic.org/download/ChartersProcdrs.pdf) provides greater detail on the NCOIC infrastructure, review and approvals process, and governance, and should be considered the definitive document for the NCOIC organization and operational model.

NCOIC Organizational Model NCOIC has three primary groups, supported by The Open Group: the Executive Council, the Business Council, and the Technical Council, as shown in Figure 6.

The O pen G roup

Executive C ouncil

A dvisory B oard

M em bers

A ffiliates

Business C ouncil

A ffiliates

Functional Team s & W orking G roups

Technical C ouncil

A ffiliates

Functional Team s & W orking G roups

Figure 6: NCOIC Organization Overview

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.1.1

Executive Council The Executive Council acts as the directing body for NCOIC. The Executive Council is comprised of one representative from each Tier 1 member. The Executive Council is led by a Chair and Vice Chair. The Vice-Chair (elected annually by Tier 1 and Tier 2 members) assumes the Chair position after one year’s service by the Chair. The Chair and Vice-Chair are nominated by Tier 1 and Tier 2 members. The Open Group and the Chairs of the Business and Technical Councils are represented on the Executive Council as non-voting members.

4.1.1.1

Chair/Vice-Chair Roles and Responsibilities

The roles and responsibilities of the Chair/Vice-Chair include:

4.1.1.2

•

Executing annual NCOIC plan and business/technical objectives (e.g., annual plan approved by Tier 1 members),

•

Identification of amendments and modifications to the plan for approval by Tier 1 Voting Membership,

•

Conducting program reviews to Voting Membership, Advisory Council, and Affiliate Council,

•

Vice-Chair is responsible for overseeing Advisory Council and Affiliate Council relations.

Executive Council Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the Executive Council include: •

Oversight of NCOIC Business and Technical Council planning efforts (may be assigned as executive oversight for working group activities),

•

Assisting in NCOIC governance and oversight duties, as requested by the Chair,

•

Managing NCOIC member relations.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.1.2

Technical Council The Technical Council is responsible for delivering the technical work products for NCOIC. The Technical Council is shown in Figure 7.

Chair Chair&&Vice-Chair Vice-Chair Technical Council

Joint Team

Standing Team

Working Group

…

The Open Group

Standing Team

Affiliates

Ad-hoc Team

Functional Teams

Working Group

Figure 7: Technical Council Overview

The Technical Council consists of Chairs for each of the Functional Teams, a Technical Council Chair and Vice-Chair, and The Open Group (non-voting). The Chair and Vice-Chair are nominated and voted on by the Voting Membership (Tier 1 and Tier 2). The Vice-Chair assumes the Chair position after one year’s service by the Chair. Affiliates and Consultants participate as requested by the Technical Council Chair (provided it is within the budget guidelines and approved by the Tier 1 membership). 4.1.2.1

Technical Council Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the Technical Council include:

•

Plan and execute NCOIC’s technical programs,

•

Maintain requirements from customers and affiliates,

•

Maintain NCOIC products, services, and technical roadmap,

•

Maintain and report technical progress and status to the membership.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.1.3

Business Council The Business Council manages the NCOIC business program including: administration, marketing and communications, customer/stakeholder relations, financial and strategic planning, legal functions, membership growth, and IT support. The Business Council is shown in Figure 8.

Chair Chair&&Vice-Chair Vice-Chair Business Council

Joint Team

Standing Team

Working Group

…

The Open Group

Standing Team

Affiliates

Ad-hoc Team

Functional Teams

Working Group

Figure 8: Business Council Overview

The Business Council consists of Chairs for each of the Functional Teams, plus the Business Council Chair, Vice-Chair, and The Open Group (non-voting). The Chair and Vice-Chair are nominated and voted on by the Voting Membership. The Vice-Chair assumes Chair position after one year’s service by the Chair. Affiliates and Consultants participate as requested by the Business Council Chair (provided it is within the budget guidelines and approved by the Tier 1 Membership). 4.1.3.1

Business Council Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the Business Council include: •

Plan and execute NCOIC’s business programs including: administration, marketing and communications, customer/stakeholder relations, financial oversight, legal functions, information technology support, and membership growth,

•

Maintain requirements from customers and affiliates in direct coordination with the Technical Council,

•

4.1.4

Report business-related progress and status to the membership.

Advisory Council The Advisory Council acts as an advisory body to the Executive Council. The role of the Advisory Council is to represent the needs of government agencies in the identification and development of the open, consensus-based approaches necessary to support transformation to NCO throughout the DoD, DHS, and other agencies.

4.1.4.1

Advisory Council Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the Advisory Council include:

4.1.5

•

Interacting with the Executive Council to identify priorities and directions of key government programs engaged in transformation to NCO,

•

Reviewing the strategic and technical plans of the NCOIC and providing feedback on NCOIC direction and strategy relative to government needs,

•

Providing input to, and review of, the NCOIC Roadmap relative to the long-term direction and needs of network-centric transformation,

•

As needed, representing the work of the NCOIC to government and industry.

Affiliate Council The Affiliate Council acts as an advisory body to the Executive Council, and may provide expert input to the Business and Technical Councils and their respective working groups and functional teams. The role of the Affiliate Council is to represent the positions, views, and work programs of their organizations as these may impact the work of the NCOIC in accelerating the acceptance and deployment of NCO/NCW systems.

4.1.5.1

Affiliate Council Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the Affiliate Council include:

•

Interacting with the councils, working groups, and functional teams to identify priorities and directions of key organizations whose work will impact/be impacted by the transformation to NCO,

•

Reviewing the strategic and technical plans of the NCOIC and providing feedback on NCOIC direction and strategy relative to selected organizations’ needs,

•

Providing input to, and review of, the NCOIC Roadmap relative to the long-term direction and needs of network-centric transformation.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.1.6

The Open Group The Open Group is the management services provider for NCOIC. It is providing management consulting services in several areas as shown in Table 1. Table 1: The Open Group Management Services Operation

Consulting

Program Management

Consultation to provide input on:

Membership infrastructure

•

Membership account management and support activities

Vendor-neutral Collaborative Development Processes

•

Membership Organizational Models

•

Architecture Methodologies

•

Customer relations

•

Marketing Communications

Implementing and managing formal review and approvals procedures Set up information technology and collaborative infrastructure Set up founding members and process memberships Facilitation on Executive, Business, and Technical Councils Providing operational logistics, information technology support, technical and business input within the Working Groups as required by the applicable Chairs Assisting in business development, marketing and communications, and technical activities that support NCOIC objectives Facilitating membership account management, expansion, and support activities

Facilitate and contribute to a process that is vendor-neutral and builds consensus throughout Ensure operation consistent with organizational open goals and vendor-neutral principles Provide technical and architectural consultation where applicable Provide consultation for certification and interoperability programs when applicable

Certification, if applicable

4.1.7

Membership Table 2 highlights NCOICâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s membership structure and entitlements. Membership fees are set according to membership tier and company size. Companies interested in NCOIC membership should contact the NCOIC Membership Team at ncoicmembership@opengroup.org. Table 2: Membership Structure

Membership

Voting Rights

Nomination Rights

Tier 1

Governance and Strategic Documents

Executive Chair/Vice-Chair

Consortium Technical Deliverables

Business Chair/ViceChair

Leadership Member. Full participation in Consortium governance and technical agendas.

All Chair/Vice-Chair Nominations

Technical Chair/Vice-Chair

Executive Council Representatives

Tier 2 Participatory Member. Full participation in Consortium technical agenda, review of governance deliverables, nominate eligible members to all leadership positions, opportunity to serve in non-Executive leadership positions. Tier 3 Non-Voting Member. Participate in Consortium Functional/Working Groups with opportunity to review governance, technical agendas, and technical deliverables.

Consortium Technical Deliverables All Chair/Vice-Chair Nominations

None

Eligible Leadership Positions Executive Council Executive Chair/ViceChair Business Council Chair/Vice-Chair Technical Council Chair/Vice-Chair Functional Team/Working Group Chair

Executive Chair/Vice-Chair Business Chair/ViceChair

Functional Team/Working Group Chair

Technical Chair/Vice-Chair

None

Functional Team/Working Group Chair

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.1.8

Review and Approval Process The review and approval process follows the standard Review and Approvals Procedures of The Open Group. Working Group Technical/Business Council

Review Manager Vendor Neutral Party

Documentation Editor

Review Board

Voting Board

Audit Board

Develop Deliverable

WG Recommends Formal Approval

Begin Preparation Forreview for Review

Recommenda tion Approved by Council

Post Deliverable for review Review Deliverable

Announce availability

Create Ballot

Post and track comments Vote

Issue Ballot

Yes Work with Review Manager to Create Announcement

Tally votes Consider Recommendations On Process Integrity

Announce results Send formal announcement Resolve change requests Prepare recommendations Sanity check

Implement Recommendations Publish

Yes

Approve

Deliverable

Figure 9: Review and Approval Process

4.2

Collaboration NCOIC has a website where members may go to collaborate on consortium tasks. This collaborative website includes public and private areas, a collaboration system for Working Groups, online balloting, a membership management system, mailing list management, and a content editor. Access to the websiteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s collaborative tools is provided only to NCOIC members registered as site users. The member website is accessible and usable from all current web browsers at global.ncoic.org. In addition, NCOIC has a public web page at www.ncoic.org. The following sections provide an overview of many of the features of the collaborative website. A more detailed tutorial by the collaborative environment vendor may be found at www.kavi.com/solutions/groups/tour.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.2.1

Users The website software and hardware are hosted by a third party under contract with NCOIC. Systems administration is performed by the same third party. If you are a registered participating company in NCOIC and would like to request access to the website as a user, send email to admin@ncoc.kavi.com. Be sure to give your full name, the name of your company, and your preferred business email address. Your request must also be accompanied by an email from a current NCOIC member user from your company concurring with your request. Once the administrator has created your user account on the website, you will receive an email containing a link that takes you to the site and prompts you to create a password. To help you remember your user name for the site, your user name will generally be set to be the same as the user name portion of your preferred business email address submitted with your access request. Once you have logged in, you should verify and add to your user information by selecting the “My Account” link on the left side of the page and then selecting the “Edit” link on the resulting “My Account” page. Included on that page is privacy setting to hide all of the information you enter from other site users.

4.2.2

Groups Users of the collaborative website may belong to any number of groups that have been defined on the site. These groups correspond to the teams or working groups that exist within NCOIC. For instance, the collaborative site contains a Technical Council group, which corresponds to NCOIC’s Technical Council. Members of the Technical Council would be able to perform online collaborative functions with other members of the Technical Council by belonging to the Technical Council group on the collaborative website. A group may have any number of members, but must have at least one Chair. Upon joining a consortium team or working group, you will not automatically become a member of the online group. You can request membership in an online group by selecting the “Join this Group” link on the group’s home page and submitting the form on the linked page. The group’s Chair must approve your membership request. Once that happens, you will receive a notification via email. Access to certain web pages, documents, and participation in certain activities of NCOIC is restricted until compliance with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) – and other U.S. legislation as appropriate – can be confirmed. New members should familiarize themselves with NCOIC policies that are online at the NCOIC Consortium Policy and Guidelines Portal at global.ncoic.org/members/access_procedures.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005) Note that the NCOIC Charters and Procedures is the definitive document and takes precedence over the content of this Section 4.

4.2.3

Calendar A calendar of upcoming events is maintained for each group. This calendar may be viewed by selecting the “Calendar” tab link shown at the top of the group’s home page. Any group member may add an event to the group calendar by selecting the “Add Event” link from the calendar page. A summary calendar of the events from all of the groups you belong to can be viewed by selecting the “My Calendar” link on the left side of the page.

4.2.4

Documents Another feature of the collaborative website is the ability to upload and share documents with other members of a group. You can see a listing of documents that have been previously uploaded for a group by selecting the “Documents” link tab at the top of the group’s home page. Documents on this page are grouped logically through a hierarchy of folders. You can also search the full textual content of uploaded documents of recognized types by specifying a key word or phrase in the text field labeled “Full Text Search” and then selecting the “Display Documents” button.

4.2.5

Ballots From time to time, the Chair of a group may create a ballot to elicit the opinions of group members on any subject. Only the Chair of a group has the necessary permissions to create a ballot. Ballots for a group may be viewed by selecting the “Ballots” link tab at the top of the group’s home page.

4.2.6

Action Items The Chair of a group may create and assign action items to members of the group. Only the Chair of a group may create action items. Action items for a group may be viewed by selecting the “Action Items” link tab at the top of the group’s home page.

4.2.7

Email A copy of all email messages that are sent to the group through the website – including notifications sent to the group for new documents, calendar events, action items, or ballots – is archived on the site. A copy of all email messages sent to the group’s email alias from anywhere outside the site is also archived on the site. A listing of a group’s archived emails may be seen by selecting the “Email” tab link at the top of the group’s home page. The email message listing shown on the resulting pop-up page may be sorted in a variety of ways by selecting the links at the top of the page. The contents of any email message may be viewed by selecting from the message listing.

NCOIC Activities To realize its mission to support and expedite the deployment of network-centric capabilities for U.S. and allied governments, NCOIC is undertaking pertinent activities and planned deliverables discussed in this section. NCOIC is organized into three major groups: the Technical Council, the Business Council, and the Executive Council. Each group is composed of sub Functional Teams as described below. The Advisory Council and the Affiliate Council – also integral to the effectiveness of the NCOIC – are described in this section.

5.1

Technical Council The charter of the Technical Council is to lead, manage, and coordinate the technical resources and activities of the NCOIC to accomplish the technical work products and deliverables. The primary objectives of the Technical Council are to: •

Provide technical leadership and inter-team coordination,

•

Generate the near and long-term Technical Roadmaps,

•

Ensure Teams and Working Groups are appropriate, are effectively staffed, work within their charters, and adhere to deliverable schedules.

The Technical Council is divided into five functional teams: 1.

Customer Requirements,

Architecture and Standards Analysis,

OTS Building Blocks,

Education and Outreach,

Engineering Processes.

The above teams are those that existed at the time this document was published (March, 2005). This list will be updated in subsequent versions as new teams are added. The most current version of the teams can be found on the NCOIC website.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

5.1.1

Customer Requirements Functional Team

5.1.1.1

Charter

To perform rigorous analysis of pertinent government agency architectures, capability needs, and mandated open standards to identify commonalities, synergies, conflicts, gaps, and potential areas for improvement. To collect and track key stakeholders and initiatives to identify areas of NCOIC focus. 5.1.1.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Customer Requirements functional team are to: •

Evaluate initiatives such as the Global Information Grid (GIG), Net-Centric Operations & Warfare (NCOW) Reference Model, Network Centric Enterprise Services (NCES), FORCEnet (Navy), C2 Constellation (Air Force), LANDWARnet (Army), Joint Battle Management Command & Control (JBMC2), Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS), and NATO Network Enabled Capability (NEC),

•

Identify customer and other stakeholder communities of interest (COI),

•

Build knowledgebase of stakeholders, initiatives, architectures, standards, and requirements using Department of Defense (DoD) Data Sharing concepts,

•

Create test-bed for describing, discovering, and sharing distributed data using member contributed products and expertise,

•

Analyze mission threads for gaps and improvement opportunities,

•

Align NCOIC technical efforts with customer and member initiatives to …

•

Increase member understanding of the customer missions and needs.

5.1.2

Architecture and Standards Analysis Functional Team

5.1.2.1

Charter

To work with customers to develop a secure interoperability framework that enables increasing degrees of Network-Centric Operations (NCO).

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

5.1.2.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Architecture and Standards Analysis functional team are to: •

Create an NCOIC Interoperability Framework (NIF) to define the applications, data, and communications elements required to design and evaluate Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) systems with respect to interoperability,

•

Create a Network-Centric Analysis Tool (NCAT) to provide for a common basis to analyze architectures and initiatives,

•

Review the various government initiatives with respect to NCO interoperability,

•

Examine mobility with regard to interoperability needs and areas for improvement,

•

Review open standards and make usage recommendations relative to interoperability.

5.1.3

OTS Building Blocks Functional Team

5.1.3.1

Charter

To use the NCOIC Interoperability Framework (NIF) to identify the widest possible community of Off-The-Shelf (OTS) and other open standards-based building blocks. 5.1.3.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the OTS Building Blocks functional team are to:

•

Create a web-based OTS product database capability,

•

Develop OTS database categories (in close collaboration with the Architecture and Standards Analysis Team),

•

Develop OTS database category requirements,

•

Post OTS database categories and solicit product nominations from the open market,

•

Evaluate and accept product nominations,

•

Post OTS database.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

5.1.4

Education and Outreach Functional Team

5.1.4.1

Charter

To develop a program for education and outreach to increase the awareness, adoption, and use of the open standards identified by NCOIC, and the understanding of the necessity to change traditional thinking, approaches, and cultures, to further accelerate NCO. 5.1.4.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Education and Outreach functional team are to: •

Develop and implement internal and external curriculum, modules, and educational stakeholders coordination meetings,

•

Develop a collaborative relationship with the Office of Force Transformation,

•

Develop a collaborative relationship with the Worldwide Consortium for the Grid (W2COG).

5.1.5

Engineering Processes Functional Team

5.1.5.1

Charter

To plan and implement strategies to develop effective collaborative engineering environments – such as uniform system engineering tools/processes, and use of modeling and simulations/demonstration laboratories – in order to test, validate, and/or demonstrate the utility of the identified open standards for increased levels of interoperability. 5.1.5.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Engineering Processes functional team are to: •

Determine and publish recommended Consortium System Engineering Tools,

•

Determine plan for interconnection of NCOIC members’ simulation/demonstration laboratories,Determine plan for connection of NCOIC members’ simulation/demonstration laboratories with government(s) customers’ laboratories,

•

Implement plan, once approved, for initial demonstration of NCOIC identified standards.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

5.2

Business Council NCOIC, as with all organizations, must have the ability to initiate and conduct business functions on an ongoing basis. Such functions include collaborative community environments, marketing and public relations, customer development and relations, governance and organizational modeling, financial management and oversight, legal, contracting and procurement, and program management/operations. All of this is in support of achieving the NCOIC mission, goals, and objectives for each of the member companies, their customers, and industry at large. The primary objectives of the Business Council are to: •

Provide the right infrastructure to support the technical agenda,

•

Fulfill the NCOIC vision by maintaining a strong, open, and diverse membership policy and by extending the NCOIC reach internationally,

•

Remove barriers for international participation in the NCOIC technical activities,

•

Ensure the NCOIC effort is closely aligned with existing and emerging customer interoperability requirements,

•

Increase awareness among the international industry and customer base,

•

Provide guidance and interpretation on all appropriate laws and regulations in order to help ensure that the NCOIC abides by the highest possible ethical and legal standards.

The Business Council is divided into eight functional teams:

Customer

Consortium Infrastructure

Membership Outreach

Market Strategies

Communications

Legal

Export Compliance

Affiliates

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

The above teams are those that existed at the time this document was published (March 2005). This list will be updated in subsequent versions as new teams are added. The most current version of the teams can be found on the NCOIC website.

5.2.1

Customer Functional Team

5.2.1.1

Charter

To ensure the NCOIC effort is closely aligned with existing and emerging customer interoperability requirements. 5.2.1.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Customer functional team are to: •

Support and facilitate the Advisory Council activities,

•

Provide an interface with government stakeholders in cooperation with the Technical Council,

•

Support and facilitate the Network Centric Operations Fellows Council,

•

Establish and maintain customer outreach rules of engagement,

•

Maintain the web-enabled customer (government stakeholders) inquiries capture and response process.

5.2.2

Consortium Infrastructure Functional Team

5.2.2.1

Charter

To provide the right infrastructure necessary for the accomplishment of the technical and business agendas. 5.2.2.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Consortium Infrastructure functional team are to: •

Develop agendas, logistics, and speakers for 2005 plenary sessions,

•

Provide support to the Budget Committee,

•

Provide HR planning and support to NCOIC,

•

Provide operations planning to include development of an annual plan in support of the NCOIC Charters and Procedures,

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

•

Develop means to employ and track Full Time Equivalent (FTE) commitments to Business Teams.

5.2.3

Membership Outreach Functional Team

5.2.3.1

Charter

To fulfill the NCOIC vision by maintaining a strong open and diverse membership policy and by extending the reach of NCOIC on a global basis. 5.2.3.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Membership Outreach functional team are to: •

Increase membership to 65 member companies by August 2005,

•

Provide a membership development plan,

•

Provide a process and people to help integrate new companies into NCOIC activities.

5.2.4

Market Strategies Functional Team

5.2.4.1

Charter

To promote and support NCOIC’s key messages and business strategies through participation in various customer-facing activities and development of marketing collateral materials. 5.2.4.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Market Strategies functional team are to:

•

Establish and manage NCOIC event participation on a global basis,

•

Maintain and manage the NCOIC speakers bureau,

•

Provide marketing support for NCOIC,

•

Provide website support for NCOIC,

•

Maintain Consortium Story Presentation.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

5.2.5

Communications Functional Team

5.2.5.1

Charter

To promote and support NCOIC’s key messages and business strategies through the recommendation and execution of various customer-facing activities and deliverables.Key Activities

The key activities of the Communications functional team are to: •

Develop an NCOIC image and branding strategy,

•

Work in conjunction with the Marketing Strategies functional team to promote NCOIC leveraging the following tools: — Press events and releases, — NCOIC speakers at key domestic and international functions, — Participation in forums and events promoting NCO, — Internal communications.

5.2.6

Legal Functional Team

5.2.6.1

Charter

To provide guidance and interpretation on all appropriate laws and regulations in order to help ensure that NCOIC abides by the highest possible ethical and legal standards. 5.2.6.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Legal functional team are to: •

Provide Advisory and Affiliate Councils member participation rules/regulations,

•

Draft legal agreement with affiliates for strategic alliance,

•

Provide legal guidance on hiring and contracting NCOIC staff,

•

Review the website for legal statements and disclaimers.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

5.2.7

Export Compliance Functional Team

5.2.7.1

Charter

To remove barriers for international participation by developing and implementing a fully functional export compliance program. 5.2.7.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Export Compliance functional team are to: •

Establish and maintain State Department Export Authorizations for NCOIC,

•

Establish an International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) Training Program for Consortium Members.

5.2.8

Affiliates Functional Team

5.2.8.1

Charter

To ensure that NCOIC is working closely with those organizations which are also working toward the provisioning of network-centric capabilities to their defense, intelligence, law enforcement, and first responder members. 5.2.8.2

Key Activities

The key activities of the Affiliates functional team are to: •

Understand the roles and ways AFEI, NCOIC, W2COG, and other affiliates can effectively support NCO,

•

Form relationships with six key industry and/or customer organizations: — Worldwide Consortium for the Grid (W2COG), — NATO Allied Command Transformation (ACT), — Association for Enterprise Integration (AFEI), — NATO Industrial Advisory Group (NIAG), — Office of Force Transformation (OFT), — Other.

•

Establish an affiliates process and rules of engagement.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

5.3

Executive Council The Executive Council is responsible for providing strategic guidance and oversight to NCOIC Working Groups. This Council is made up of senior representatives from the organizations that comprise the founding membership in NCOIC. The Executive Council is comprised of all the Tier 1 members. Their responsibilities, entitlements, and voting rights are defined in the NCOIC Charters and Procedures document, which takes precedence over any governance and operational information in this document. For a summary of their rights and entitlements, see Section 4.1.

5.4

Advisory Council The NCOIC Advisory Council was formed to ensure that the NCOIC remains focused on its objectives and that it is accessible to all stakeholders. The role of the Advisory Council is to represent the needs of government agencies in the identification and development of the open, consensus-based approaches necessary to support transformation to NCO throughout the DoD, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and other agencies.

5.5

Affiliate Council The NCOIC Affiliate Council acts as an advisory body to the Executive Council, and may provide expert input to the Business and Technical Councils and their respective working groups and functional teams. The role of the Affiliate Council is to represent the positions, views, and work programs of their organizations as these may impact the work of the NCOIC in accelerating the acceptance and deployment of NCO/NCW systems.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

Technical Work Products This section describes key NCOIC work products needed to achieve network-centric interoperability at reduced risk and quick time-to-market using industry best practices and extensive use of open standards. The deliverables defined in this section are illustrative, but not exhaustive. These deliverables characterize the kind of work products that will be produced. Others are sure to follow, or be delivered in parallel (e.g., interoperability checklists, standards checklists, etc.).

6.1

Customer Requirements Key work products from the Customer Requirements functional team include:

6.2

•

Reports and analysis on customer initiatives from the industry perspective relative to interoperability and Network-Centric Operations (NCO),

•

Knowledgebase of stakeholders, initiatives, architectures, standards, and requirements for internal NCOIC use, implemented using Department of Defense (DoD) Data Sharing concepts,

•

Reports on identified gaps and improvement opportunities in various mission threads.

Architecture and Standards Analysis Key work products from the Architecture and Standards Analysis functional team include: •

The NCOIC Interoperability Framework (NIF) The NIF will provide a hierarchical structure for defining and describing the communications and information elements recommended for creating nodes in interoperable Network-Centric Warfare (NCW) systems. This structured approach extends from operational usage considerations to detailed protocol and standards, which span all levels of the problem space.

•

The Network-Centric Analysis Tool (NCAT): The NCAT will provide a formalized method and criteria to provide for a common basis to analyze architectures and initiatives. This tool will use a metric-based approach to

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

evaluating/measuring a system’s, subsystem’s, or component’s “fitness” for operating in a net-centric environment; that is, extend the net ready check list. •

In-depth analysis and recommendations in key NCO areas: The first area being addressed is Mobile Networks. Other areas under consideration include Information Assurance and Services and Information Interoperability. Additional areas for investigation will be added as the NCOIC grows.

6.3

OTS Building Blocks The key planned product of the Building Block functional team is a web-based product database that identifies products suitable for building NCO systems based on NCOIC recommendations, using Off-the-Shelf (OTS) and other open standards-based building blocks.

6.4

Engineering Processes The NCOIC will identify and collect experience-based best practices based on anticipated usage of NCOIC’s products. The key product will be a set of documented NCOIC Systems Engineering Processes, published to promote uniform systems engineering usage of NCOIC technical team products. NCOIC will also undertake a survey to establish the potential for the interconnection of NCOIC members’ and government(s) customers’ simulation and demonstration laboratories to demonstrate interoperability using NCOIC-identified standards.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

Opportunity This section describes the potential opportunity and techniques for existing and new systems after applying the recommendations promoted by NCOIC. The term “system” is used to represent people, process, and technology aspects of existing solutions. There are many attributes of a system that must be addressed for interoperability including applications, tools, security, change management, etc. The lists shown in the figures in this section are examples only.

7.1

Status Quo Some systems will not be able to integrate or interoperate with other systems – this is reality. There are various reasons why this can occur. Examples include: •

Lack of skills to change existing system,

•

Operational requirement,

•

Lack of funding to change existing system,

•

Existing system extremely proprietary,

•

Existing system implemented with old technology.

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Figure 10: Status Quo for System

These systems will use swivel chair integration – screens sitting side by side on a desktop or wall.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

7.2

Basic Integration Some systems should be able to provide a basic level of integration. There are various levels at which basic integration can occur. Examples include: •

Exchange of data through files on predetermined schedules,

•

Exchange of data through program invocation using messaging or program stubs,

•

Exchange of documentation about mission and business processes.

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Integration Data Enablement

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Figure 11: Basic Integration

Basic integration was a common first step in sharing data between disparate, competitive, or line of business systems. The goal was to provide added systems value between the organizations owning the systems. This non-standard approach required a pre-existing agreement between systems for updates, protocols, and schedules.

7.3

Open Standards Integration The use of open standards for basic integration is a significant improvement. It is a necessary first step to achieving interoperability and service-oriented architectures. Integration Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Open Standard Schemas Information Enablement

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Figure 12: Basic Open Standards Integration

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

This level of integration allows for semantic interpretation of the exchanged data. This is considered information – data + semantics. The exchange of meta-information at build, run, or manage stages in the system’s lifecycle allows systems to share data through a meaningful and manageable technique. Recently, basic open standards integration has benefited from the use of Extensible Markup Language (XML) for message exchange and the deployment descriptors and Enterprise Archive (EAR) files in Java 2 Platform Enterprise Edition (J2EE) environments. Examples of open standards-based integration points include:

7.4

•

Visual – Presentations and visual access are exchanged,

•

Data – Access to raw SQL, File, Queued, or other data sources are shared between systems,

•

Service – Access to function, methods, and business logic are shared between systems.

Interoperability As previously mentioned, interoperability is a more rigorous goal (and achievement) when compared to technical integration. In addition to the technical integration points, interoperability adds necessary integrity features to the integration points. After a common architectural framework is established, systems developers will be able to deliver higher quality systems with less duplication of effort. By using the open standards identified for use in the NCOIC architectural framework’s lower (e.g., communications and information services) tiers, developers will be able to devote more time to the application development that provides greater value and return to the customer. Interoperability Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Open Standard Schemas Information Security Transactions Semantics

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Figure 13: Interoperability

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Generally, the integrity features allow multiple systems to be treated as a single system. Features include:

7.5

•

Security – Access to multi-level security context between systems,

•

Transaction – Access to run full two-phase commit and identify demarcation boundaries between systems,

•

Problem Management – Ability to detect, diagnose, and provide remedies for problems.

Network-Centric Interoperability The use of architectures built from a common architectural framework will also allow system developers to be secure in the knowledge that they will in fact be able to communicate with other systems developed from the same architectural framework, especially when another vendor developed the other system. This also facilitates removal of some of the required research and guesswork from proposal development. At this stage, systems built using open standards, from a common architectural framework, will also have increased portability and upgradeability, creating new opportunities for vendors to provide value to the customer. Systems built on these standards will also be easier to migrate to wholly new systems as new technologies are developed and become available. In full network-centric interoperability, systems share more than run-time information. Artifacts used during the build lifecycle can be exchanged, privately or openly. These include: •

Models for Architecture, Designs, and Simulations – Based on open standards meta-data (i.e., Unified Modeling Language (UML) Version 2, Architecture Design Simulation (ADS)),

•

Re-usable Choreography – Long and short running, request and transactional, based on open standards meta-data (i.e., Business Process Execution Language (BPEL), Feed Directory Markup Language (FDML)),

•

Re-usable Process and Tools Extensions – Ability to enhance open tool set with additional tools, process steps, compilers, monitors, etc. (i.e., Eclipse).

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Net Centric Interoperability

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Open Standard Schemas Information Security Transactions Semantics Reference Models Patterns

Applications Systems Hardware Security Protocols Tools Process Data

Build Run Manage

Figure 14: Network-Centric Interoperability

In full network-centric interoperability, systems also share the ability to share build artifacts to support integration techniques. This can include:

•

Applications – Portable cross-platform application logic (i.e., J2EE Web Application Archive (WAR), Java Archive (JAR), and EAR files),

•

Portals – Portable cross-platform visual applications (i.e., Java Specification Request (JSR) XXX Portal),

•

Services – Portable, locatable, and invocable services used in service-oriented architecture solutions (i.e., Universal Discovery, Description, and Integration (UDDI), Web Services Specifications (WS*)),

•

Security – Multi-level security via standard protocols,

•

Patterns – Re-usable patterns for pub/sub, complex event processing, time critical targeting, etc.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

In full network-centric interoperability, systems also share the ability to be run and managed, where appropriate, as a single system. This is a challenging task and, fortunately, open standards for various levels of system management have existed for years. Still, restart /recovery, disaster recovery, systems performance, testing, deployment, and other issues need to be solved for full network-centric interoperability in operations. The previous figures show a new system (green outline) designed from top to bottom and across the lifecycle using open architectural frameworks. An existing system (in grey fill) is not able to change. The grey existing system has a faĂ§ade that interacts with other interoperable systems. The various sized boxes show systems of different form factors (hand-held systems, flying systems, operation center systems, business systems, etc.). All of the systems may come into the network-centric environment for periods of time and then leave. They discover and interoperate via one or more information and services buses. The new system can extend, build, run, and manage tools and techniques to provide more seamless integration of the systems with which it needs to be validated. Basing system architectures on standards from a common open architectural framework will allow NCOIC members to adopt best industry practices that enable greater efficiencies of development and result in fewer system development failures. This will reduce risk and also increase value to the customer.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

Frequently Asked Questions 1.

What is the purpose of NCOIC?

The intent of NCOIC is to accelerate the introduction of Network-Centric Operations (NCO) capabilities in order to enable interoperability in systems that serve Joint, Interagency, and Multi-national (JIM) users. In recent decades, some of the most advanced defense systems in the world have been developed, yet many of these complex systems exist as stovepipe systems that were not designed to be interoperable. Thus, many of today’s advanced systems do not currently interoperate from a mission or joint perspective – interoperability between the military, other government agencies, multi-national, industrial, civil, and consumer operations that are becoming increasingly imperative. 2.

What will NCOIC do?

The major intent of NCOIC is two-fold. First, to develop and promote systems engineering architectural frameworks to be considered when contemplating the development of network-centric systems. These architectural frameworks will be based on groups of open standards across the system lifecycle. •

Developing specific network-centric architectures is a daunting task, especially when there are very few total “green field” initiatives.

•

Successes in commercial information technology and open standards will provide a necessary starting point.

•

Architectural frameworks, promoting best practices, will provide guidance on how to develop the architecture that best suits a given situation.

Second, through the introduction of NCO, significant gains may be afforded via the use of existing (and future) Standards-based Commercial Off-The-Shelf (SCOTS) technologies. NCOIC will identify potential SCOTS building blocks and/or provide mechanisms for certifying the suitability for use of such SCOTS building blocks. 3.

Who would participate in NCOIC?

NCOIC will be international, open, inclusive, and have a diverse membership base. Participants will include representatives from: major defense system integrators (e.g., aerospace contractors); information technology industry enterprises; other industry enterprises from a broad range of

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

market sectors; academic institutions; and members of other industry associations with related or similar interests. Government (U.S. and, potentially, representatives from allies – e.g., NATO) would participate to the level that rules for industry consortia permit. 4.

Isn't similar work already underway?

Not exactly. Groups currently exist that are similar in name but have different objectives. Many of these working groups and standards bodies are working on various aspects of NCO, and have been doing so for many years. The three key differentiating aspects of NCOIC are:

•

Interest in, and need for, developing system engineering/network-centric principles (as opposed to solution-centric architectures) that will achieve a level of commonality through an industry-led forum.

•

Focus on the use of existing open standards and COTS technologies to address rapid deployment and cost efficiencies.

•

Focus on the “last mile". There is a lot of work that addresses the centralized aspects of interoperability, but far less that addresses the technical issues at the most remote points in global networks. It is noteworthy that NCOIC will recognize existing complementary work, provide references to potential users of this large body of knowledge, and establish liaison with other standards bodies.

What's in this for the various members?

There is a strong value proposition for NCOIC. The government will be able to field, maintain, and upgrade network-centric systems more quickly and more cost-effectively. Defense systems integrators will be able to affect solutions faster – and thus pursue business opportunities of scale on shorter time cycles – consistent with the rapid advancement of information technology. Finally, information technology systems firms will benefit through the prospect of having elements of their COTS portfolios recognized as building blocks for future systems. 6.

Why was such a Consortium proposed?

Boeing, along with at least 15 other companies, believes that NCOIC has the potential to offer great benefit to the U.S. government (and other friendly governments) in addition to the added prospect of providing complementary benefit to industry. Thus, Boeing offered to serve as “ombudsman” to introduce the concept for consideration. Now that NCOIC is independent, Boeing is simply another member – no more and no less than any other member. 7.

How will the work of NCOIC affect competition on future pursuits?

NCOIC will focus development of solutions in the manner that building codes enable a city to develop and create new environments that allow for production, banking, services, sales, etc. to thrive on top of the city infrastructure. Participation in NCOIC will not affect the actions of the independent firms in pursuing business in the free marketplace. Clearly, each of the members will pursue business at their own will and may or may not elect to use exclusively the body of knowledge that is developed via NCOIC.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

How would the scope of this effort be defined?

The heart of this effort is the development and deployment of the systems engineering best practices architectural framework that could be used as a starting point for the definition of future NCO architectures (specific solutions). A suggestion has been offered that the technical representatives of the NCOIC investigate four dimensions of this pursuit: •

Define an approach to articulate such an architectural framework

•

Identify other, similar work that is already underway

•

Identify a methodology to perform “gap analyses” to ensure that an architectural framework would be as inclusive as possible

•

Develop representative “use cases”

It is the view of the initial participants that pursuit of information on these four topics will be helpful in scoping the overall initiative. 9.

How does the government community view NCOIC?

The NCOIC approach has been discussed with many recognized leaders in the customer community over the past three years. Most have readily embraced the need for such an initiative and very well understand the profound benefits of being enabled to operate in a network-centric environment.

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

List of Acronyms The following acronyms are used in this Position Paper: ADM

Architecture Development Method

ADS

Architecture Design Simulation

AFEI

Association for Enterprise Integration

API

Application Programming Interface

ACT

Allied Command Transformation (NATO)

BNMP

DoD Business Management Modernization Program

BPEL

Business Process Execution Language

COI

Community of Interest

COTS

Commercial Off-The-Shelf

CoA

Course of Action

DCGS

Distributed Common Ground System

DHS

Department of Homeland Security

DIMHRS

Defense Integrated Military Human Resources Systems

DLA IDE

Defense Logistics Agency Integrated Data Environment

DoD

Department of Defense

DTC

Defense Trade Controls

DTSA

Defense Technology Security Agency

EAR

Enterprise Archive File (Java)

FDML

Feed Directory Markup Language

FTE

Full Time Equivalent

GIG

Global Information Grid

GOTS

Government Off-The-Shelf

HUMINT

Human Intelligence

IEC

International Electrotechnical Commission

ISO

International Standards Organization

ITAR

International Traffic in Arms Regulations

JAR

Java Archive

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOICâ&#x201E;˘)

J2EE

Java 2 Platform Enterprise Edition

JBMC2

Joint Battle Management Command & Control

JIM

Joint, Interagency, and Multi-national

JSR

Java Specification Request

MDA

Model Driven Architecture

MoD

Ministry of Defense

NATO

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NCAT

Network-Centric Analysis Tool

NCES

Network Centric Enterprise Services

NCO

Network-Centric Operations

NCOIC

Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium

NCOW

Net-centric Operations & Warfare

NCW

Network-Centric Warfare

NEC

Network Enabled Capability (NATO)

NIAG

NATO Industrial Advisory Group

NIF

NCOIC Interoperability Framework

OFT

Office of Force Transformation

OTS

Off-The-Shelf

RFID

Radio Frequency Identification

Situational Awareness

SAI

Strategic Acquisition Initiative

SCOTS

Standards-based Commercial Off-The-Shelf

SOW

Statement of Work

UDDI

Universal Discovery, Description, and Integration

UML

Unified Modeling Language

W2COG

Worldwide Consortium for the Grid

WAR

Web Application Archive (Java)

WS*

Web Services Specifications

XML

Extensible Markup Language

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Trademarks Java® is a registered trademark and J2EE™ is a trademark of Sun Microsystems, Inc. Kavi® is a registered trademark of Kavi Corporation. MDA® and Model Driven Architecture® are registered trademarks of the Object Management Group (OMG). NCOIC™ is a trademark of the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium. The Open Group® is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the U.S. and other countries. UML® is a registered trademark of the Object Management Group (OMG). NCOIC acknowledges that there may be other brand, company, and product names used in this document that may be covered by trademark protection and advises the reader to verify them independently.

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)

Acknowledgements NCOIC and The Open Group gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the following people in the development of this document: •

Technical Council Chair – Alan Murdoch, Northrop Grumman

•

Technical Council Vice-Chair – Mike Curtis, IBM

•

Working Group Leader & Document Editor – Peter Bahrs, IBM

•

Working Group and Technical Council Members: Mark Bowler, Boeing Rob Biddlecomb, Northrop Grumman Jim Burke, Lockheed Martin Corporation William Carmichael, Rockwell Collins Ken Cureton, Boeing Steve Ditlinger, Boeing Courtney Edwards, Boeing Josh Grosse, EMC Steve Haken, Sun John Hiu, Cisco Uma Jha, Boeing Robert Lawrence, BAE Systems Dave Lounsbury, The Open Group Paul Mangione, Global Business Analysis Frank Miller, Rockwell Collins Karen Mowrey, Boeing Al Nauda, Raytheon Tim Pavlick, IBM John Poladian, HP Steve Russell, L3 Krishna Sankar, Cisco Dave Shaw, Kroll Global Business Analysis Joe Siniscalchi, L3 Rich Waldschmidt, Rockwell Collins Timothy Wellman, Raytheon

NCOIC Position Paper V2.0 (2005)

Informative References The following documents provide useful background information to this Position Paper: [1]

DoD News Transcript, Secretary Rumsfeld at Fort Hood Town Hall Meeting August 21, 2002 www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug2002

[2]

Operational Sense and Respond Logistics: Coevolution of an Adaptive Enterprise Capability – Concept Document (Long Version) May 6, 2004 www.oft.osd.mil/initiatives/srl/S&RL%20Concept_40_page.doc

[3]

Network Centric Warfare – Developing and Leveraging Information Superiority David S. Alberts, John J. Garstka, Frederick P. Stein published by the DoD C4ISR Cooperative Research Program (CCRP)

[4]

Military Information Technology – Online Edition December 31, 2003 www.military-information-technology.com

[5]

C4 Interoperability of Our Warfighters Rep. Jim Mitchel January 2, 2004 www.cndyorks.gn.apc.org/yspace/articles/c4i_interop.htm

[6]

Welcome to TOGAF 8: Enterprise Edition 2004, The Open Group www.opengroup.org/architecture/togaf8/index8.htm

[7]

DoD Network-Centric Data Strategy May 9, 2003 www.dod.mil/nii/org/cio/doc/Net-Centric-Data-Strategy-2003-05-092.pdf

[8]

IBM ESS e-business Reference Architecture V2.3: An Overview for Customers 2004, IBM Corporation

[9]

NCOIC Charters and Procedures www.ncoic.org/download/ChartersProcdrs.pdf

An Introduction to the Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium (NCOIC™)